Philosophy Now Forum

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 2:22 pm
So one has to "clean one's own room," rather than manage world affairs. And the impact of many of us "cleaning our own room" is what changes the world -- not some mad leap into international political advocacy, which does nobody good and achieves nothing.

But here's what the mad preooccupation with world affairs does to people: it frees them from their own present moral duties, and lets them imagine they're being "morally good" for nothing more than imaginatively supporting "causes," agreeing with the rhetoric theoretically, and actually doing nothing at all.

Morality is, if nothing else, a local matter. The globe goes its own way; and that way is actually dependent on the number of people who will take their own moral responsibility to heart, and "clean their own room."

Or, as you prefer to put it, "take a look in the mirror," rather than in the world press.

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 3:20 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 2:22 pm
So one has to "clean one's own room," rather than manage world affairs. And the impact of many of us "cleaning our own room" is what changes the world -- not some mad leap into international political advocacy, which does nobody good and achieves nothing.

But here's what the mad preooccupation with world affairs does to people: it frees them from their own present moral duties, and lets them imagine they're being "morally good" for nothing more than imaginatively supporting "causes," agreeing with the rhetoric theoretically, and actually doing nothing at all.

Morality is, if nothing else, a local matter. The globe goes its own way; and that way is actually dependent on the number of people who will take their own moral responsibility to heart, and "clean their own room."

Or, as you prefer to put it, "take a look in the mirror," rather than in the world press.

But be fair, IC, you don't know if he does both.

Yes they are ranting about injustices far away from them. But they are also taking their turn dishing out food at the soup kitchen.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 2:22 pm

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 4:36 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 3:53 am

You're not getting it. I'm not American. How hard is that to understand? You're talking to the wrong person. I've got no pony in that race.
But you need a trip to your therapist, just to get that bile out of your system. It's rotting your brain, apparently.

I understand you're not American, neither am I, but it is what is happening in the world right now, and even if you consider yourself a world citizen, it should be of significant interest.

I'm not a "world citizen." "Citizen" means "dweller of a city," not "dweller of a planet, so the term is actually absurd. People are always local: that's the function of being in a body -- one cannot be in many places at once, only one. So human beings are inevitably local, and their involvement in the larger world can only radiate diminishingly from a local hub.

So one has to "clean one's own room," rather than manage world affairs. And the impact of many of us "cleaning our own room" is what changes the world -- not some mad leap into international political advocacy, which does nobody good and achieves nothing.

But here's what the mad preooccupation with world affairs does to people: it frees them from their own present moral duties, and lets them imagine they're being "morally good" for nothing more than imaginatively supporting "causes," agreeing with the rhetoric theoretically, and actually doing nothing at all.

Morality is, if nothing else, a local matter. The globe goes its own way; and that way is actually dependent on the number of people who will take their own moral responsibility to heart, and "clean their own room."

Or, as you prefer to put it, "take a look in the mirror," rather than in the world press.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 1:13 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 2:22 pm

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 4:36 am

I understand you're not American, neither am I, but it is what is happening in the world right now, and even if you consider yourself a world citizen, it should be of significant interest.

I'm not a "world citizen." "Citizen" means "dweller of a city," not "dweller of a planet, so the term is actually absurd. People are always local: that's the function of being in a body -- one cannot be in many places at once, only one. So human beings are inevitably local, and their involvement in the larger world can only radiate diminishingly from a local hub.

So one has to "clean one's own room," rather than manage world affairs. And the impact of many of us "cleaning our own room" is what changes the world -- not some mad leap into international political advocacy, which does nobody good and achieves nothing.

But here's what the mad preooccupation with world affairs does to people: it frees them from their own present moral duties, and lets them imagine they're being "morally good" for nothing more than imaginatively supporting "causes," agreeing with the rhetoric theoretically, and actually doing nothing at all.

Morality is, if nothing else, a local matter. The globe goes its own way; and that way is actually dependent on the number of people who will take their own moral responsibility to heart, and "clean their own room."

Or, as you prefer to put it, "take a look in the mirror," rather than in the world press.

WORLD CITIZEN


**A world citizen is someone who identifies as part of a global human community, recognizing shared rights, responsibilities, and interconnectedness beyond national borders.**

Here’s a deeper look at what that means:

### Core Principles of World Citizenship
- **Global Identity**: A world citizen sees themselves as belonging to humanity as a whole, not just to a single nation, ethnicity, or culture. This identity transcends geography and political boundaries.
- **Shared Responsibility**: They acknowledge that their actions—social, environmental, economic—can impact people across the globe. This includes advocating for human rights, sustainability, and equitable resource use.
- **Interconnectedness**: World citizens understand that global challenges like climate change, poverty, and conflict require collective solutions. They embrace cooperation across cultures and nations.
- **Cultural Openness**: They engage respectfully with diverse cultures, challenge stereotypes, and promote mutual understanding.
- **Active Engagement**: Being a world citizen isn’t just a mindset—it’s about taking action to shape global values and practices, whether through education, activism, or everyday choices.

### Legal and Philosophical Dimensions
- **Legal View**: Some organizations, like the World Service Authority, advocate for legal recognition of world citizenship, suggesting that all humans are born with rights that transcend national law.
- **Philosophical View**: The concept draws from cosmopolitanism, which holds that all humans belong to a single moral community. It’s a response to globalization, emphasizing unity over division.

### 🛠 Practical Implications
- Supporting fair trade and ethical consumption
- Participating in global movements (e.g., climate action, human rights)
- Educating oneself and others about global issues
- Voting or advocating for policies that consider global impact

In essence, world citizenship is a call to expand our sense of belonging and responsibility—from local to planetary. It’s not about abandoning national identity, but about *extending allegiance to humanity and the Earth*.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 1:13 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 2:22 pm

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 4:36 am

I understand you're not American, neither am I, but it is what is happening in the world right now, and even if you consider yourself a world citizen, it should be of significant interest.

I'm not a "world citizen." "Citizen" means "dweller of a city," not "dweller of a planet, so the term is actually absurd. People are always local: that's the function of being in a body -- one cannot be in many places at once, only one. So human beings are inevitably local, and their involvement in the larger world can only radiate diminishingly from a local hub.

So one has to "clean one's own room," rather than manage world affairs. And the impact of many of us "cleaning our own room" is what changes the world -- not some mad leap into international political advocacy, which does nobody good and achieves nothing.

But here's what the mad preooccupation with world affairs does to people: it frees them from their own present moral duties, and lets them imagine they're being "morally good" for nothing more than imaginatively supporting "causes," agreeing with the rhetoric theoretically, and actually doing nothing at all.

Morality is, if nothing else, a local matter. The globe goes its own way; and that way is actually dependent on the number of people who will take their own moral responsibility to heart, and "clean their own room."

Or, as you prefer to put it, "take a look in the mirror," rather than in the world press.

A world citizen is someone who identifies as part of a global human community, recognizing shared rights, responsibilities, and interconnectedness beyond national borders.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:53 am
Our world has enough Greta Thunbergs. One was one too many, actually.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:53 am
We have no end of them today. They claim to be passionate about the great "out there" -- the climate, international relations, global peace -- so they don't have to be moral about their own actions or pay attention to their own moral responsibilities. They have blue hair and nose rings, or run about in black suits, throwing bricks through shopkeepers windows and burning car dealerships, and are totally mindless with regard to how they're behaving to the people who are right in front of them. And this carelessness, this amorality, they think, makes them even more moral and righteous than those who do not occupy themselves with things they cannot influence, merely because their fantasies are larger.

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 2:27 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:53 am
We have no end of them today. They claim to be passionate about the great "out there" -- the climate, international relations, global peace -- so they don't have to be moral about their own actions or pay attention to their own moral responsibilities. They have blue hair and nose rings, or run about in black suits, throwing bricks through shopkeepers windows and burning car dealerships, and are totally mindless with regard to how they're behaving to the people who are right in front of them. And this carelessness, this amorality, they think, makes them even more moral and righteous than those who do not occupy themselves with things they cannot influence, merely because their fantasies are larger.

But WHY (based on what) are you assuming that many who are activists on these large issues are not ALSO active on the home front issues.

Take that big "No Kings" rally the other weekend.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:14 pm

But slow down for a minute. Look at them not as a mob, but as one individual picked out of the herd. What is that one individual doing at that moment? What emotions are rushing through him/her? Why is he/she convinced he's righteous to charge at the police, or to throw a rock at somebody, or even to beat up a shopkeeper and steal her goods? What is the moral status of that individual, who is just one of many individuals in that mob? Is he/she a virtuous warrior, or just a spoiled child who is not even aware of what he/she is doing in regard to moral action?

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 10:40 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:14 pm

But slow down for a minute. Look at them not as a mob, but as one individual picked out of the herd. What is that one individual doing at that moment? What emotions are rushing through him/her? Why is he/she convinced he's righteous to charge at the police, or to throw a rock at somebody, or even to beat up a shopkeeper and steal her goods? What is the moral status of that individual, who is just one of many individuals in that mob? Is he/she a virtuous warrior, or just a spoiled child who is not even aware of what he/she is doing in regard to moral action?

And THIS is the sort of behaviors you were observing at the "No Kings" event you observed?

Who do you think came to these events?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Oct 30, 2025 12:18 am

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 10:40 pm
And THIS is the sort of behaviors you were observing at the "No Kings" event you observed?

What I saw online...there were no such demonstrations in my country, of course.

Who do you think came to these events?

Fools.

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Thu Oct 30, 2025 2:31 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Oct 30, 2025 12:18 am

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 10:40 pm
And THIS is the sort of behaviors you were observing at the "No Kings" event you observed?

What I saw online...there were no such demonstrations in my country, of course.

Who do you think came to these events?

Fools.

Interesting. You had on-line sources showing these events as riots rather than "we are all united in opposition" celebrations (THAT was the mood where was).

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:53 am

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 1:13 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 2:22 pm
I'm not a "world citizen." "Citizen" means "dweller of a city," not "dweller of a planet, so the term is actually absurd. People are always local: that's the function of being in a body -- one cannot be in many places at once, only one. So human beings are inevitably local, and their involvement in the larger world can only radiate diminishingly from a local hub.

So one has to "clean one's own room," rather than manage world affairs. And the impact of many of us "cleaning our own room" is what changes the world -- not some mad leap into international political advocacy, which does nobody good and achieves nothing.

But here's what the mad preooccupation with world affairs does to people: it frees them from their own present moral duties, and lets them imagine they're being "morally good" for nothing more than imaginatively supporting "causes," agreeing with the rhetoric theoretically, and actually doing nothing at all.

Morality is, if nothing else, a local matter. The globe goes its own way; and that way is actually dependent on the number of people who will take their own moral responsibility to heart, and "clean their own room."

Or, as you prefer to put it, "take a look in the mirror," rather than in the world press.

A world citizen is someone who identifies as part of a global human community, recognizing shared rights, responsibilities, and interconnectedness beyond national borders.

In other words, a fantasist who imagines that his personal moral responsibility can be sublimated into virtue signalling about matters over which he actually has no control, and about scopes and dimensions in which he has no influence. A brat with a high moral self-image.

We have no end of them today. They claim to be passionate about the great "out there" -- the climate, international relations, global peace -- so they don't have to be moral about their own actions or pay attention to their own moral responsibilities. They have blue hair and nose rings, or run about in black suits, throwing bricks through shopkeepers windows and burning car dealerships, and are totally mindless with regard to how they're behaving to the people who are right in front of them. And this carelessness, this amorality, they think, makes them even more moral and righteous than those who do not occupy themselves with things they cannot influence, merely because their fantasies are larger.

Our world has enough Greta Thunbergs. One was one too many, actually.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 05, 2025 7:25 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:53 am

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 1:13 am
A world citizen is someone who identifies as part of a global human community, recognizing shared rights, responsibilities, and interconnectedness beyond national borders.

In other words, a fantasist who imagines that his personal moral responsibility can be sublimated into virtue signalling about matters over which he actually has no control, and about scopes and dimensions in which he has no influence. A brat with a high moral self-image.

We have no end of them today. They claim to be passionate about the great "out there" -- the climate, international relations, global peace -- so they don't have to be moral about their own actions or pay attention to their own moral responsibilities. They have blue hair and nose rings, or run about in black suits, throwing bricks through shopkeepers windows and burning car dealerships, and are totally mindless with regard to how they're behaving to the people who are right in front of them. And this carelessness, this amorality, they think, makes them even more moral and righteous than those who do not occupy themselves with things they cannot influence, merely because their fantasies are larger.

Our world has enough Greta Thunbergs. One was one too many, actually.

You must be an American — lol!!

Back on topic: There is no such experience as objectivity to a subjective consciousness, period.