Philosophy Now Forum

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 1:31 pm

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 1:00 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 12:55 pmAnd if I cause others to suffer, then I deserve to suffer as well.

Nah, if you cause others to suffer, then you deserve to see that and learn and do better next time.

I don't want to cause suffering.

I don't want that either brother, nor do I want you to suffer.

Adding more suffering into the world to pay for prior caused suffering doesn't make anything better, it only adds more suffering. Punishing for punishments sake is, imo, completely senseless.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 2:11 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 2:04 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 1:44 pm I'm afraid even if I read your response like 1 billion times over, I probably would come to the same conclusion about it, and that would be that I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

It's as if he ate too much of his goulash, threw it up, and then tried to produce a verbal representation of the mess on the floor.

There's only two things happening here. Make a mess, clean the mess. Rinse and repeat.

Sorry for the mess, dear. Who would you like to take out the trash when we get it all cleaned up? Or would you prefer I supervise? However, I'm afraid I don't know how to supervise or what to tell anyone to do, so perhaps I should try to do some of the cleaning? I'm sorry for inviting him. I hope he doesn't make any more messes with the goulash. I just hope he's potty trained.

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 2:04 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 1:44 pm I'm afraid even if I read your response like 1 billion times over, I probably would come to the same conclusion about it, and that would be that I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

It's as if he ate too much of his goulash, threw it up, and then tried to produce a verbal representation of the mess on the floor.

I get the feeling he thinks he is going to be the first person who is able to get the ship out of the bottle without breaking the bottle.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 2:08 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 1:56 pmThis is meaningless rubbish.

No, it's not.

Precious? Absolutely.

100% on the mark? Of course not.

But it ain't meaningless or rubbish.

Why precious?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 12:32 pm Why don't you just stop listening to other peoples experiences and listen only to your own.

I listen to both. But that's a bit of an odd suggestion coming from someone who regularly sends other people's experiences my/our way in the form of quotes. Why are you quoting so many...experts?

If the shoe fits wear it, but reality never meant to imply one shoe fits all.

Peachy. I have a pretty diverse set of philosophical shoes.

Life is what happens when we are busy making other plans.

or posting on the internet. Me, I am not rich and have no sugar daddy or mamma, so some planing is obligatory. But then, I also like planning. I also notice that everybody else plans, even good old JL until that got taken away from him.

If you want to get metaphysical about all this, then throw away your own idea that there is a you who has consciousness, in that state, there you will find your metaphysics, if you insist on the idea being real.

There's a bunch of ways to get metaphysical and yes, that's one.

“Metaphysics in philosophy is, of course, supposed to characterize what is real – literally real. The irony is that such a conception of the real depends upon unconscious metaphors.”

I love Lakoff's work. And he's got a metaphysics also. And he spent decades showing people what their unconscious metaphors are, so they were conscious.

A conclusion Carlyle drew based on his own metaphysics.

Except this of course. Here Lakoff's abstractions are literal...for some reason.

But I do love the guy, as far as he goes. The schema's of metaphors he found and connecting language to the motor cortex, great stuff.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 2:20 pm I get the feeling he thinks he is going to be the first person who is able to get the ship out of the bottle without breaking the bottle.

There is no ship, there is no bottle. It was never in and will never be out.

See? Two can play at the same game!

Statement 1: Life is what happens when we are busy making other plans.

Statement 2: Or posting on the internet.

Statement 3: Or when assassinating John Lennon.

Gotta see things from all angles, right?

I guess he came over to play games? Any idea what he's doing or why he's doing it?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 2:23 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 12:32 pm Why don't you just stop listening to other peoples experiences and listen only to your own.

I listen to both.

If the shoe fits wear it, but reality never meant to imply one shoe fits all.

Peachy. I have a pretty diverse set of philosophical shoes.

Life is what happens when we are busy making other plans.

or posting on the internet. Me, I am not rich and have no sugar daddy or mamma, so some planing is obligatory. But then, I also like planning. I also notice that everybody else plans, even good old JL until that got taken away from him.

If you want to get metaphysical about all this, then throw away your own idea that there is a you who has consciousness, in that state, there you will find your metaphysics, if you insist on the idea being real.

There's a bunch of ways to get metaphysical and yes, that's one.

“Metaphysics in philosophy is, of course, supposed to characterize what is real – literally real. The irony is that such a conception of the real depends upon unconscious metaphors.”

I love Lakoff's work. And he's got a metaphysics also. And he spent decades showing people what their unconscious metaphors are, so they were conscious.

A conclusion Carlyle drew based on his own metaphysics.

Except this of course. Here Lakoff's abstractions are literal...for some reason.

But I do love the guy, as far as he goes. The schema's of metaphors he found and connecting language to the motor cortex, great stuff.

Sorry, but I don't agree with you Iwannaplato that there is a 'someone' who is conscious.

See? Two can play at the same game!
Top

Babble begets babble

phyllo wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 2:29 pm Babble begets babble

But Henry has told us that it's not rubbish. So do we clean it up or let it stick?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 2:08 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 1:56 pmThis is meaningless rubbish.

No, it's not.

Precious? Absolutely.

100% on the mark? Of course not.

But it ain't meaningless or rubbish.

I'm sorry, henry, but my verdict is final.

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 2:22 pmWhy precious?

Your filigree is off-putting. Almost as eye-blistering as Age's. Your substance -- kinda -- makes up for it.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 2:28 pm Sorry, but I don't agree with you Iwannaplato that there is a 'someone' who is conscious.

But there are unconscious metaphors? Even if you don't believe in individuals or someones, you brought up unconsciousness, which only makes sense and certainly in Lakoff who you were quoting as contrasted with consciousness. Perhaps it's non-dual consciousness. But Lakoff spent decades bringing unconscious metaphors into consciousness. You present it as if this cannot be done. Oh but it can, persons existing or not.

Why do you listen to other people's stories, like Lakoff's and not your own?

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 2:23 pm See? Two can play at the same game!

Who sees two playing the same game, but the same one, not two.