~~~ Could You Sell EVERY Possession You Own? ~~~

[Arising_uk]

.
I don't mean to seem to try and derail your hated or attack upon me but I need to clarify something.

Once again you think too much of yourself. You are probably a mighty fine chap, it's your thoughts I oppose and given you say they are not you I fail to see why you take it personally.

For me, in my case, I do not condone illiteracy. Just the opposite.

Fair enough, I may be guilty of over exaggerating but your posts have been replete with the idea that reading is passe and reading those we call philosophers a waste of time and effort.

The intellect is absolutely essential for the development of a well rounded and civilized member of society. In addition, for me, reading certain authors was an essential part of my personal development with philosophy. I LOVE TO READ.

According to you you can't read an article anymore? You also said you stopped reading in your teens. I think you should have carried on with your personal development and read more of the canon of philosophy. As your certain authors appear to have left you a bit short.

What I have been trying to make clear is that there is a possibility to surpass the intellect for some individuals in their relationship to philosophy.

Tell me what aspect of the intellect it is that you think needs surpassing?

A time when you evolve beyond the intellect alone and actually exercise your philosophical chops as it were.

It's you that thinks the intellect has to be divorced from the rest of 'thought'. This is an error.

You experience, you live what you have learned.

Given you say you stopped reading philosophy in your teens I think you short of a chunk of lived learning. That you have an 'ivory tower' view of reading and learning is an error as reading and learning should be a life-long process, one that is integrated into ones actions and behaviour.

You become.

...for some, you become.

And this is what I mean by the words of a budding gnu. Become what? As so far you're pretty short on explanation or technique.

Okay, I'm done. Now you can continue your attack upon me.[/size]

Get over yourself.
p.s.
Your picture just about sums up what you've become, philosophically that is.

[Lakin]

"Arising_uk" : Sticking on the robe and taking up the bowl, abandoning his possessions, meditating, yoga and growing veg.

So what businness is that of yours you patronising fool ?
What is your life like ? let me guess .....

Show me where Bill does what Schopenhauer did. Show me where Schopenhauer followed Buddhism.

It was Hinduism you clot and if you had a degree in Philosophy you would know that .

Nope, I argue against his stance that illiteracy is a plus, that words are pointless and useless as a means of expression, that those we call the philosophers are not worth reading, that depression is the source of philosophising,

He was using that idea for emphasis and not exclusively and if you were an academic, as you claim to be ,you would see that .

What synthesis and between which strands? Who are you thinking about, the continentals, Nietzsche? The theological metaphysicians, Huxley? The Moonies?

You are telling him that Western philosophy is not fragmented ,again, showing your ignorance of the subject.Also that Western philosophy is exclusively "logical" .

Unknown to you, the ignorant uneducated one, there is a distinct dichotomy among Western philosophies, between secular philosophies and religious philosophies developed within the context of a particular monotheistic religions and obvious dogma—especially some creeds of Protestant Christianity.

But I admit to it being many moons ago

When you were in the nut house .

You know nada about philosphy . You are a nutter on a forum trying to be someone important
but you just reveal yourself to be poorly educated and a clown.
God forbid this guy from Ohio thinks that all English people are like you.
I'd tell Bill Wiltrack, straight, that your kind are in our mental hospitals and not
on the streets, if we can help it.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.








...........................................









.

[Lakin]

Yes it was a great dust off and the audience has seen greatness tonight .
I thank you all .

[Bill Wiltrack]

.









.................................................










.

[Arising_uk]

So what businness is that of yours you patronising fool ?

It's a forum numbnuts. Mind that English DPhil spelling ability.

What is your life like ? let me guess .....

Go ahead.

Try to use your DPhill to punctuate and capitalise correctly when you do.

It was Hinduism you clot and if you had a degree in Philosophy you would know that .

I know you loon but Hinduism does not promote the abandonment of possessions, Buddhism does. Which tradition do you think The World as Will and Representation drew upon then genius?

He was using that idea for emphasis and not exclusively and if you were an academic, as you claim to be ,you would see that .

If you'd been reading his 'thoughts' for the last few years you'd know you are talking bollocks.

I don't claim to be an academic, just got a few pieces of paper that say I can be educated.

You are telling him that Western philosophy is not fragmented ,again, showing your ignorance of the subject.Also that Western philosophy is exclusively "logical" .

Where did I say that? Although I agree that the shining glory and the only thing that Western philosophy can call its own is Logic.

You conspicuously fail to answer my questions.

What do you mean by fragmented? The only fragmentation I remember was between Anglo-American and Continental philosophy. At the time I studied it was pretty much academic suicide to study Continental philosophy but since I was a mature student and had no interest in such a career I read it and most enjoyable it was.

Unknown to you, the ignorant uneducated one, there is a distinct dichotomy among Western philosophies, between secular philosophies and religious philosophies developed within the context of a particular monotheistic religions and obvious dogma—especially some creeds of Protestant Christianity.

Oh that! I thought 'religious philosophy' had pretty much been consigned to the metaphysical dustbin.

When you were in the nut house .

True, the Polytechnic of North London was full of loons but it was the only Poly allowed to award an Hons degree in Philosophy. After that I went to a true nut-house, Imperial College, as I thought science needed philosophers, big mistake.

You know nada about philosphy .

I know how to spell it.

You are a nutter on a forum trying to be someone important
but you just reveal yourself to be poorly educated and a clown. ...

Unlike you bunky I'm not here to proclaim my qualifications but to just have a frank chat. Shouldn't you be in a Literature forum?

God forbid this guy from Ohio thinks that all English people are like you.
I'd tell Bill Wiltrack, straight, that your kind are in our mental hospitals and not
on the streets, if we can help it.

Not heard of 'scare in the community'?

You sound familiar. *Woof* *Woof*?

[Lakin]

Try to use your DPhill to punctuate and capitalise correctly when you do.

As an English graduate of Oxford University ,I should advise a drop out from night school ,that there are no exact rules of punctuation, in English Language.

I know you loon but Hinduism does not promote the abandonment of possessions, Buddhism does. Which tradition do you think The World as Will and Representation drew upon then genius?

I am sorry to have to advise you of a basic error in your academic learning and that is that
,Hinduism rejects the value of personal possessions ,as in Buddhism .

I agree that the shining glory and the only thing that Western philosophy can call its own is Logic..........

How can you make such a claim when you have no academic understanding of Eastern philosophy and your grasp of western philosophy is a conceptual joke.

I thought 'religious philosophy' had pretty much been consigned to the metaphysical dustbin.

What you are doing is confusing Philosophy with Natural Science.

What do you mean by fragmented? The only fragmentation I remember was between Anglo-American and Continental philosophy.
At the time I studied it was pretty much academic suicide to study Continental philosophy but since I was a mature student and had no interest in such a career I read it and most enjoyable it was.

So why are you lecturing Bill Wiltrack on the merits of Western Philosophy vs Eastern Philosophy when the only Eastern literature you have read is a menu in a Chinese restaurant?

I don't claim to be an academic, just got a few pieces of paper that say I can be educated.

Speaking of your prowess in the English Language, I would love you to rephrase that sentence, so that it makes grammatical sense .
I think what you mean is you got a certificate that confirmed you went to night school.

Unlike you bunky I'm not here to proclaim my qualifications

Arising's previous posts : "DPhil (Hons) .... I've also got a PGCE FE qualification.
...... I've also got an MSc and DIC ".

True, the Polytechnic of North London (I attended) was full of loons

Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury ; the prosecution rests its case.

[Arising_uk]

As an English graduate of Oxford University ,I should advise a drop out from night school ,that there are no exact rules of punctuation, in English Language.

Well that certainly explains how you got your qualification.

I am sorry to have to advise you of a basic error in your academic learning and that is that
,Hinduism rejects the value of personal possessions ,as in Buddhism .

Hinduism is a vast practice, care to say which school you are thinking about? But I will take you word for this as I fall into this secular camp you identified.

How can you make such a claim when you have no academic understanding of Eastern philosophy and your grasp of western philosophy is a conceptual joke.

My academic understanding of western philosophy is fairly comprehensive as I've pretty much read the canon. It's this 'academic understanding' by Westerners of 'Eastern Philosophy' that I challenge as such 'philosophies' are essentially practices and I see little practice but many words by the Westerners.

Are you saying my claim that Logic is the one thing that Western philosophy can truly claim to be its own and it's true glory, untrue?

What you are doing is confusing Philosophy with Natural Science.

And you are forgetting that the metaphysicians of natural science have proved the effectiveness of their epistemology but many in philosophy appear to wish it not to be so.

So why are you lecturing Bill Wiltrack on the merits of Western Philosophy vs Eastern Philosophy when the only Eastern literature you have read is a menu in a Chinese restaurant?

I'm not. On the whole and in general my relationship with Bill is about me pointing out that his ideas have been done better, that if what he says is true then he can't talk about it but should supply the practices to achieve the state he claims exists and opposing his stance that not reading philosophy is a virtue.

Speaking of your prowess in the English Language, I would love you to rephrase that sentence, so that it makes grammatical sense .
I think what you mean is you got a certificate that confirmed you went to night school.

That you deride 'night schools' certainly proves your Oxford credentials. Unfortunately I did not attend such an institution nor did I study English but, just for you, I think an academic is someone who makes a living from academia, I don't, so I don't consider myself an academic(this also applies to being a philosopher). However I do have the certificates that say I've passed one degree, one masters and a post-grad qualification so proving that I can be educated. Clear enough for you?

Arising's previous posts : "DPhil (Hons) .... I've also got a PGCE FE qualification.
...... I've also got an MSc and DIC ".

PAY ATTENTION AT THE BACK THERE!

Bachelor of Arts(Hons)Philosophy, Master of Science Foundations of Advanced IT, Diploma of Imperial College, Post Graduate Certificate of Education FE.

Unlike you I did not arrive proclaiming such things but just responded to you asking me what qualifications I had.

True, the Polytechnic of North London (I attended) was full of loons

You should have an ellipse here.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury ; the prosecution rests its case.

Like most interweeb loons you are very selective in your reading and responses.

You definitely sound familiar. Woof! Woof!

[Lakin]

What illiterate verbiage you talk .
The last DUSTING OFF you had shows how you
have put your (pseudo) intellectual eggs all in one basket. Cluck Cluck .
The jury's verdict is below.

[artisticsolution]

If you sold every possession you owned then you would have money. Doesn't money count as a possession?

That being said. I could sell every possession I own...including the clothes off my back...but not only would I feel exposed and vulnerable I would BE exposed and vulnerable.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.



Excellent perception.


I guess I should have thought this out more.


Is there a better way I could have worded the original post or design my query into a more philosophical directive?



Good post.


Thank you for adding...





.

[Lakin]

artisticsolution

If you sold every possession you owned then you would have money. Doesn't money count as a possession?

No, it doesn't feature logically in the same argument. The case is that one can live without spending money on material objects as a source of comfort.
Having money is not the same case .Many of those who dispense of surrounding objects
have lots of money in the bank because they don't buy things.

That being said. I could sell every possession I own...including the clothes off my back...but not only would I feel exposed and vulnerable I would BE exposed and vulnerable.

Again you fail on logic. The case is not disposing of all things which are classified as objects.
The case is not coveting possessions which are not necessarily needed for survival.

[artisticsolution]

artisticsolution

If you sold every possession you owned then you would have money. Doesn't money count as a possession?

No, it doesn't feature logically in the same argument. The case is that one can live without spending money on material objects as a source of comfort.
Having money is not the same case .Many of those who dispense of surrounding objects
have lots of money in the bank because they don't buy things.

That being said. I could sell every possession I own...including the clothes off my back...but not only would I feel exposed and vulnerable I would BE exposed and vulnerable.

Again you fail on logic. The case is not disposing of all things which are classified as objects.
The case is not coveting possessions which are not necessarily needed for survival.

Hi Lakin,

I think I understand...the question was asked figuratively speaking...I was taking it too literal.

Language was never my strong suit as I believe aesthetics gets in the way of meaning. Like with this thread titled: "Could You Sell EVERY Possession You Own"

I realize there is a underlying meaning having to do with eastern philosophy...but if I were an alien from another planet I may not have this common knowledge. Sometimes I feel like an alien from another planet.

It is so much easier when people say what they mean and mean what they say.

[Lakin]

Arising_uk"

Are you saying my claim that Logic is the one thing that Western philosophy can truly claim to be its own and it's true glory, untrue?

Yes it is complete nonsense.

On the whole and in general my relationship with Bill is about me pointing out that his ideas have been done better

No, your accusation is that he is cobbling western and eastern philosophy together, which
is what Arthur Schopenhauer did ,which proves that Sunday School college does not
provide one with a rounded understanding of Philosophy,

that if what he says is true then he can't talk about it but should supply the practices to achieve the state he claims exists

Why can he not talk about it as an aspiration or a future goal ?

and opposing his stance that not reading philosophy is a virtue.

Marcus Aurelius said exactly the same thing .

That you deride 'night schools' certainly proves your Oxford credentials. Unfortunately I did not attend such an institution nor did I study English but, just for you, I think an academic is someone who makes a living from academia, I don't, so I don't consider myself an academic(this also applies to being a philosopher). However I do have the certificates that say I've passed one degree, one masters and a post-grad qualification so proving that I can be educated. Clear enough for you?

It's clear that these qualifications were aspirations but you did not complete the course.

Bachelor of Arts(Hons)Philosophy, Master of Science Foundations of Advanced IT, Diploma of Imperial College, Post Graduate Certificate of Education FE.

Fantasist!You do not talk like someone who is educated. You talk like someone who
aspires to be educated.

Unlike you I did not arrive proclaiming such things but just responded to you asking me what qualifications I had.

I didn't ask you what qualifications you had I said you had none.
You started to bandy around qualifications .

[Lakin]

Artisticsolution :

I think I understand...the question was asked figuratively speaking...I was taking it too literal.

You were taking it too literally.

Language was never my strong suit as I believe aesthetics gets in the way of meaning. Like with this thread titled: "Could You Sell EVERY Possession You Own"

Nothing about the money in that title.

I realize there is a underlying meaning having to do with eastern philosophy...but if I were an alien from another planet I may not have this common knowledge. Sometimes I feel like an alien from another planet.

Famous quotation for you and the chicken : It is a capital mistake to speculate without data.

It is so much easier when people say what they mean and mean what they say.

You need to chip away at meaning without drawing instant conclusions.