Philosophy Now Forum

Greta wrote

Again, no reference to what one prefers. It's simply checking out what's going on and comparing notes with others.

Will Nick ever muster the humility to simply observe reality without judging from his "lofty" moral standpoint?

I have observed that your conclusions leave a lot to be desired. They rest on two obvious fallacies. 1. the inability to distinguish between evolution or the change of being moving closr to its source and adaptation or change within a quality of being and 2. the belief that the meaning and purpose of Man is to be a better machine reacting within one level of reality. Is the modern purpose of Man is to serve machines instead of the human view that the purpose of machines is to serve man?

So, Nick, what of your precious theism in a million years when the oceans start boiling off as the Sun heats? If we retreat from progress back into religious infantilism then intelligent life on Earth will soon be completely extinguished. Now THAT is a horrible thought. It is only with progress and technology that anything beyond genes can be salvaged of life's progress from the current planetary imbalances.

The future of Man, providing we survive the rapid advances in technology, will be conscious man. It will be the New Man as alluded to in the Bible. Conscious Man will have its place within the universal structure receiving from above and giving to below serving objective human meaning and purpose.

The remnants of secular Man will reside on an enormous space ship. Millions of decapitated heads placed in vats will be the total of life on this craft. Each of these vats will contain all that is necessary to keep the heads alive and the brains will live a programmed imaginary life. When a life is lived, the program will repeat and repetition will occur forever assuring secular Man’s immortality.

Will life on earth as it is now offer the transition into conscious life as the future for Man or will secularism deny vertical human consciousness and crush the natural impulse towards it to the degree that life in the vat seems preferable to extinction? One thing for sure. Secular intolerance will do its best to assure the denial of conscious life serving as a connection between above and below. It must in order to sustain its egoistic dominance.

If you want to understand multinational corporations, know thyself. They have the same failings.

This claim of Nick's is empty of content.

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 3:49 pmThis claim of Nick's is empty of content.

If you can find one that isn't, you win a biscuit.

“There are only two kinds of scholars; those who love ideas and those who hate them.” Emile Chartier

For those who consider philosophy to still be the love of wisdom as opposed to the love of egoistic argument, these two kinds of scholars have appeared many times. Secular education is filled with them. Only ideas supporting their imagined self importance can be tolerated. All else must be condemned. It must be one or the other. Appreciating them together as a paradox is an insult to them.

“One must not think slightingly of the paradoxical…for the paradox is the source of the thinker’s passion, and the thinker without a paradox is like a lover without feeling: a paltry mediocrity.” ` Kierkegaard

Absurd for the secularist. The secular thinker’s passion comes from asserting its brilliance and condemning what doesn’t realize it. Those who don’t know it are paltry mediocrities and must be reeducated.

“Take away paradox from the thinker and you have a professor.” Kierkegaard

I call them “experts” but it is the same idea. We have experts like Greta and Fooloso4 who have risen far above the infantile joy of pondering the paradox as levels of reality. The Great Beast is their god and secularism is the only philosophy worthy of this god. All ideas including a source of existence far above their god must experience the wrath of secular intolerance. No joy in contemplation of levels of existence; just wrath against who or whatever doubts the supremacy of the Beast as the ultimate in human evolution. Woe to all those who doubt secular progressive education.

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 3:49 pm

If you want to understand multinational corporations, know thyself. They have the same failings.

This claim of Nick's is empty of content.

It seems that way since you've never experienced self knowledge which reveals your hypocrisy. The hypocrisy of multinational corporations is just an extension of what you are. Taken together it is called the fallen human condition. We are hypocrites so what can be expected other than hypocrisy?

Nick_A wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:27 pm The hypocrisy of multinational corporations is just an extension of what you are. Taken together it is called the fallen human condition. We are hypocrites so what can be expected other than hypocrisy?

As a statement in and of itself without further ado, it is obviously correct. That people have specialized in hypocrisy throughout the ages is hardly news; an honor that belongs to theists at least as much is it does to members of the Great Beast and for the same reason; human nature.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:27 pm
It seems that way since you've never experienced self knowledge which reveals your hypocrisy.

Don't be so quick to judge, Nick. When Simone said "I may have the face of a bat but I shag like a rabbit", I think she was warning us of the dangers in letting superficially based impressions become a barrier to digging deeper, where, very often, there are unexpected treasures to be found. Don't make the mistake of dismissing everyone as bats and miss out on all the fun with the rabbits, Nick.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:56 pm "I may have the face of a bat but I shag like a rabbit."

That's an awesome quote from Simone. I may have misunderestimated her.

Dubious wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:52 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:27 pm The hypocrisy of multinational corporations is just an extension of what you are. Taken together it is called the fallen human condition. We are hypocrites so what can be expected other than hypocrisy?

As a statement in and of itself without further ado, it is obviously correct. That people have specialized in hypocrisy throughout the ages is hardly news; an honor that belongs to theists at least as much is it does to members of the Great Beast and for the same reason; human nature.

I agree. People can call themselves many things from theists to atheists. They are all just expressions of imagination normal for cave life. Until a person admits the human condition, everything remains the same. We just turn in circles and live by the hypocrisy natural for the human condition.

Nick wrote;

The hypocrisy of multinational corporations is just an extension of what you are. Taken together it is called the fallen human condition. We are hypocrites so what can be expected other than hypocrisy?

There is a huge difference of degree between the machinations of multinational corporations and the petty self deceptions that you or I do. Great institutions become autonomous and separated from the human. Once the institutions are adrift from humane or traditional ethics they become affixed to the profits motive and even to white collar crime. Propaganda takes the place of normal news media, and deliberate political agitation moves in to divide people from people.

davidm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 8:10 pm That's an awesome quote from Simone. I may have misunderestimated her.

Apparently, she led what may be called a double life. It all came to a head when Mrs Goebbels came home unexpectedly and found Simone in the marital bed with Joseph, wearing his cap and Nazi armband and nothing else. Needles to say, after that, she found it necessary to make herself scarce ASAP and scarpered to America. As for Goebbels, the master of propaganda found himself tested to the limit as far as his famous, persuasive, rhetorical skills were concerned, and even then never managed to fully convince his wife that Simone had just wandered into dem Haus and slipped into their bed, uninvited, while he was having his afternoon nap. You won't find that in any of the biographies.

davidm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 8:10 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:56 pm "I may have the face of a bat but I shag like a rabbit."

That's an awesome quote from Simone. I may have misunderestimated her.

Have Bushisms become part of the language or did he get them from 'MeriamWebster'?

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:05 pm Nick wrote;

The hypocrisy of multinational corporations is just an extension of what you are. Taken together it is called the fallen human condition. We are hypocrites so what can be expected other than hypocrisy?

There is a huge difference of degree between the machinations of multinational corporations and the petty self deceptions that you or I do. Great institutions become autonomous and separated from the human.

I think this is a major fallacy. It's tantamount to saying humans cease to be responsible in proportion to the megaliths they create. This is a very dangerous idea one that monolithic corporations, financial institutions, etc., depend on by being accepted as too big to fail. We hear that expression a lot lately! Corporations depend on that being true shielding the excess power of those who control them.

The "petty deceptions", as those that exist between individuals, are the same deceptions massively magnified by corporations. To imagine otherwise is to succumb completely to the duplicity of those in control.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:36 pm

davidm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 8:10 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:56 pm "I may have the face of a bat but I shag like a rabbit."

That's an awesome quote from Simone. I may have misunderestimated her.

Have Bushisms become part of the language or did he get them from 'MeriamWebster'?

It's a clever coupling, no doubt intentional, of misunderstood and underestimated.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:36 pm

davidm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 8:10 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:56 pm "I may have the face of a bat but I shag like a rabbit."

That's an awesome quote from Simone. I may have misunderestimated her.

Have Bushisms become part of the language or did he get them from 'MeriamWebster'?

Harbal has been obsessed with the bush for years. It is a way of affirming that he is one of the beautiful people. His bushisms don't have to have any truth in them. They are just expressions of an obsession which celebrates the bush as one of the most important parts if not the most important part of the Great Beast.