Philosophy Now Forum

-1- wrote: ↑Mon May 14, 2018 1:10 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun May 13, 2018 10:35 pm I was talkin' to Gaffo, not you, -1-.

Make your references clear, then, please. I am tired of guessing who is saying what to whom.

Quote him, or use their alias, or something, in your reply. It takes such little effort to do the right thing and yet dozens of people on this forum make the same mistake over and over again, as what you just did.

I hate unreferenced or ambiguously referenced material.

with respect to you - and agree he could have referenced me - but he did refer to "seeing other posts where i claim to value humlity" - and many post i do reference such virtue, and so strive to affirm being a humble person, know he was refering to me.

Nope.

I don't see humility as a virtue; don't see bein' humble as virtuous.

So: I got no reason to cultivate such a thing (a vice).

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon May 21, 2018 1:58 am Nope.

I don't see humility as a virtue; don't see bein' humble as virtuous.

So: I got no reason to cultivate such a thing (a vice).

Humility is strictly knowing your place from a neutral perspective. It is not about denigrating, and obviously not uplifting, yourself. It really is about centering oneself and there place.

Hence we can observe false humility under self-abuse.
And in some circumstances we can observe humility under stating good objective truths about one's nature.

I don't believe the neutrality you mention is possible. We aren't neutral creatures. So, humility, to my thinkin', is always an exercise in self-aggrandizement. I prefer folks who view themselves as superior to be honest about it, which the humble are not.

Ever since the US invaded Afghanistan, there has been a record opium crop every single year. War abroad, heroin problem at home. What a coincidence. The CIA is the biggest dope dealer in the world. If you snapped your fingers and abolished all illicit drugs from the world overnight, half the multinational banks would go out of business. They launder the money and reap the profits.

If anyone here is actually interested in the global drug trade, read some books and learn what you're talking about. This stuff isn't secret, it's widely known among people who study the issue. It's just not talked about on the evening news where you get your daily dose of bullshit and hysteria.

http://www.businessinsider.com/opium-pr ... rd-2017-11

https://www.google.com/search?q=the+pol ... e&ie=UTF-8

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegatio ... rafficking

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom ... 07110001-8

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom ... 07110001-8

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Wed May 23, 2018 3:19 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon May 21, 2018 1:58 am Nope.

I don't see humility as a virtue; don't see bein' humble as virtuous.

So: I got no reason to cultivate such a thing (a vice).

Humility is strictly knowing your place from a neutral perspective. It is not about denigrating, and obviously not uplifting, yourself. It really is about centering oneself and there place.

Hence we can observe false humility under self-abuse.
And in some circumstances we can observe humility under stating good objective truths about one's nature.

agreed. some lack understanding due to their base nature. it is worthy to champion virtue even to those that lack.

but sometime you just have to cut your loses and except that your nature is "above" thiers - you are self actualized, while they are still mired in their base personal demons.

and just note each persons character - or lack there of - and move on. (i.e don't be "holier than thow and condemn then - just leave the be and note them and others (esp the latter - who have character and ears to hear your message),

note character and lack of, and be true to yourself when you "preach".

peace and thanks for your thoughtful reply.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed May 23, 2018 4:39 pm I don't believe the neutrality you mention is possible. We aren't neutral creatures. So, humility, to my thinkin', is always an exercise in self-aggrandizement. I prefer folks who view themselves as superior to be honest about it, which the humble are not.

People are people, from us both good and evil extend and from this good and evil a synthetic neutrality occurs. People cannot be looked at in the manner of a half empty/half full mentality (there actions yes), but rather strictly as just water in a glass. This triadic observation of the human condition gives a fuller understand of what it is, is not, and what is possible. People are just people.

Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Sun May 06, 2018 3:28 am I think that nothing should be done about it. It is an individual's decision to take an addictive drug. We can educate the public, but I also don't necessarily want that to be through the government.

I agree. Let freedom ring. However, I disagree that a government 'by the people and for the people' should be restricted. That's just a catalyst for corporate dictatorship to fool you into complacency.

artisticsolution wrote: ↑Mon Jun 25, 2018 6:52 pm

Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Sun May 06, 2018 3:28 am I think that nothing should be done about it. It is an individual's decision to take an addictive drug. We can educate the public, but I also don't necessarily want that to be through the government.

I agree. Let freedom ring. However, I disagree that a government 'by the people and for the people' should be restricted. That's just a catalyst for corporate dictatorship to fool you into complacency.

You should agree with both, because that post is about government restricting freedom if it chooses to do more than education. But why I think it shouldn't even do that, is because we've already tried a nationally funded drug education program in america - Reagan's D.A.R.E. It was really, really dumb, even on paper in terms of deterring drug use.

You can also just look at pretty much every facet of the government and see how it has historically sucked at giving drug information and drug evaluation.

If you think any society can exist today without a government you are being naive.

I think a government 'for the people by the people' is the best one can hope for. At least nothing stays the same and everyone gets a chance to govern for a time.

I couldn't and wouldnt want to live in your trump world forever. And thank god, because of our constitution by the people, I wont have to.

Anyway, truth and kindness always wins out in the end.

artisticsolution wrote: ↑Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:00 pmIf you think any society can exist today without a government you are being naive.

I mean...I..I just said that the government shouldn't educate us on drugs. I wasn't advocating for pure anarchy, but okay...

I couldn't and wouldnt want to live in your trump world forever. And thank god, because of our constitution by the people, I wont have to.

I don't even like president trump.

Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Mon Jun 25, 2018 10:18 pm

artisticsolution wrote: ↑Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:00 pmIf you think any society can exist today without a government you are being naive.

I mean...I..I just said that the government shouldn't educate us on drugs. I wasn't advocating for pure anarchy, but okay...

I couldn't and wouldnt want to live in your trump world forever. And thank god, because of our constitution by the people, I wont have to.

I don't even like president trump.

Doesnt matter...if you are advocating to limit our government by the people to one that ties the peoples hands, then you are trumponian.

Just who do you think will be in charge in a smaller government? Not me and you...i can tell you that. Wake up! Dont let the corporations fool you into complacency with their propaganda.

You have to think a few steps ahead.

...Because I don't want to feed the american people propaganda about drugs...