Philosophy Now Forum

.


Humans have been insulting what they dislike with the term "beast" for millennia. The silliness of it all is almost Pythonesque.

Walker wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2017 3:25 am Is this the beast?

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/08/31 ... d-revenue/

The Beast is a creature of reaction blindly responding to force as do all creatures. Simone Weil describes force in her essay on the Iliad. From Wiki

Weil introduces the central theme of her essay in the first three sentences:
"The true hero, the true subject, the centre of the Iliad, is force. Force employed by man, force that enslaves man, force before which man's flesh shrinks away. In this work at all times, the human spirit is shown as modified by its relation to force, as swept away, blinded, by the very force it imagined it could handle, as deformed by the weight of the force it submits to." She proceeds to define force as that which turns anyone subjected to it into a thing – at worst, into a corpse...........

From the Google article

On Tuesday evening, Google sent a conservative website an ultimatum: remove one of your articles, or lose the ability to make ad revenue on your website. The website was strong-armed into removing the content, and then warned that the page was "just an example and that the same violations may exist on other pages of this website."

"Yesterday morning, we received a very bizarre letter from Google issuing us an ultimatum," Shane Trejo, media relations director of the Republican Liberty Caucus of Michigan, wrote on The Liberty Conservative. "Either we were to remove a particular article or see all of our ad revenues choked off in an instant. This is the newest method that Big Brother is using to enforce thought control."

Sounds like mods from a secularized philosophy site graduated into politically correct big business and teamed up with big brother..

Sounds like mods from a secularized philosophy site graduated into politically correct big business and teamed up with big brother..

This is reference to the banning of a professional theist troll named Nick_A from the forum I moderate about a year ago. He has been banned from at least one other forum as well, a religious one, so he is at least an equal opportunity troll.

This obsessive religious maniac was ruining the forum with numerous repeat threads and circular posting, nonsense claims and constant antagonising and ill will. So we did what needed to be done - we removed the parasite. The forum has improved dramatically since in all respects. There are plenty of other theists on the forum who somehow manage to post without being aggressive and insulting.

The process is akin to extricating a tapeworm. Not easy, and takes time to heal, but we are getting there. It is amazing the damage one small toxin or parasite can do to a larger body.

Greta wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2017 8:37 am

Sounds like mods from a secularized philosophy site graduated into politically correct big business and teamed up with big brother..

This is reference to the banning of a professional theist troll named Nick_A from the forum I moderate about a year ago. He has been banned from at least one other forum as well, a religious one, so he is at least an equal opportunity troll.

This obsessive religious maniac was ruining the forum with numerous repeat threads and circular posting, nonsense claims and constant antagonising and ill will. So we did what needed to be done - we removed the parasite. The forum has improved dramatically since in all respects. There are plenty of other theists on the forum who somehow manage to post without being aggressive and insulting.

The process is akin to extricating a tapeworm. Not easy, and takes time to heal, but we are getting there. It is amazing the damage one small toxin or parasite can do to a larger body.

This is a perfect example of secular intolerance. It is an emotional attitude against the esoteric perspective which asserts man's nothingness in comparison to man's conscious perspective. It is simply intolerable for the secular mind which glorifies self esteem and has the Great Beast as its God. Consider this thread. Who is generating negativity and ad hom attacks.

I expect this mindset to be directed at me since my beliefs are offensive to the defensive secular ego. The problem is that this same attitude has become dominant in secular education and when you read the negativity in Greta's words, it is obvious it can be intimidating to a young mind beginning to find itself. Nothing can be more harmful for a young mind then negativity of this intensity and the misguided belief that its negativity is justified. The kid feels they are wrong. The Google thread Walker linked is the same idea. These progressive experts in right and wrong become hostile to whatever questions their imagined superiority.

If you are not dead yet inside, be happy you are not a young person in a secular educational institution having to endure the negativity and hostility of secular intolerance against the young opening to the esoteric needs of their heart.. It is like an attack from hell. Not very pleasant. Under these circumstances is it any wonder that so many turn to drugs as an alternative to the loss of meaning secular intolerance generates?

Nick_A wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:53 pm

Greta wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2017 8:37 am

Sounds like mods from a secularized philosophy site graduated into politically correct big business and teamed up with big brother..

This is reference to the banning of a professional theist troll named Nick_A from the forum I moderate about a year ago. He has been banned from at least one other forum as well, a religious one, so he is at least an equal opportunity troll.

This obsessive religious maniac was ruining the forum with numerous repeat threads and circular posting, nonsense claims and constant antagonising and ill will. So we did what needed to be done - we removed the parasite. The forum has improved dramatically since in all respects. There are plenty of other theists on the forum who somehow manage to post without being aggressive and insulting.

The process is akin to extricating a tapeworm. Not easy, and takes time to heal, but we are getting there. It is amazing the damage one small toxin or parasite can do to a larger body.

This is a perfect example of secular intolerance. It is an emotional attitude against the esoteric perspective which asserts man's nothingness in comparison to man's conscious perspective. It is simply intolerable for the secular mind which glorifies self esteem and has the Great Beast as its God. Consider this thread. Who is generating negativity and ad hom attacks.

I don't think so. There is nothing specifically "secular" about it. Tolerance cannot be extended to the intolerant.
If you are talking bollocks then it is right for someone to point that out. This is not an Ad hominem..
An ad hominem would apply if the speaker were making the claim that your argument was false BECAUSE you are a religious nut. No such claim has been made.

Insults are insults. Accurate observations are accurate observations. An ad hominems are ad hominems.

But the fact that you make ridiculous claims, that make people think of you as a religious nut is simply the consequence of you making idiotic claims. There is a difference.
Now that we know you are a religious nut, there is still a fair chance that something you might say is a good idea, point of discussion, or argument. But when you continue to talk bollocks that needs be pointed out. That does not make it an ad hominem.
FYI
The point of lost contact in your above post was the phrase; " glorifies self esteem and has the Great Beast as its God." Which is where rational people turn off.

Nick wrote:

If you are not dead yet inside, be happy you are not a young person in a secular educational institution having to endure the negativity and hostility of secular intolerance against the young opening to the esoteric needs of their heart..

Also consider:

If you are not dead yet inside, be happy you are not a young person in a religious educational institution having to endure the negativity and hostility of religious intolerance against the young opening to the esoteric needs of their heart..

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2017 2:48 pm Nick wrote:

If you are not dead yet inside, be happy you are not a young person in a secular educational institution having to endure the negativity and hostility of secular intolerance against the young opening to the esoteric needs of their heart..

Also consider:

If you are not dead yet inside, be happy you are not a young person in a religious educational institution having to endure the negativity and hostility of religious intolerance against the young opening to the esoteric needs of their heart..

Religious intolerance and secular intolerance are the same. Their gods are different. Religious intolerance features a personal god that defines your obligations for you. Secular intolerance worships the Great Beast as its god which defines your obligations for you. There is a minority who seek an alternative and are unwilling to just choose their god. They will be hated by advocates of both gods which is why when they gather in pursuit of realistic understanding it is always done in private. It has to be to protect their own lives and to retain the purity of the esoteric search from corruption by "experts" and their modifications.

Nick wrote:

Religious intolerance and secular intolerance are the same. Their gods are different. Religious intolerance features a personal god that defines your obligations for you. Secular intolerance worships the Great Beast as its god which defines your obligations for you. There is a minority who seek an alternative and are unwilling to just choose their god. They will be hated by advocates of both gods which is why when they gather in pursuit of realistic understanding it is always done in private. It has to be to protect their own lives and to retain the purity of the esoteric search from corruption by "experts" and their modifications.

Esoteric mysticism is not a substitute for academic philosophy, or for any other human endeavour that requires self discipline and native intelligence. You cannot take this short cut to knowledge the short cut of esoteric mysticism, and there is no philosopher of any academic standing who can support your undisciplined narrative.

You are wasting your time trying to fit your narrative to academic philosophy. In order to win the wisdom of academic philosophyneed to apply yourself and do some real work.You try to justify your laziness by appealing to your personal esoteric elevation. I would have thought that you would suspect your appeals to facile esotericism to be self deception. Like Fooloso4 I think you possibly have the native intelligence you'd need. There are several people in this group who could help you to advance, and in doing so you could also join in the fight against the worst excesses of the establishment.

Nick:

They will be hated by advocates of both gods which is why when they gather in pursuit of realistic understanding it is always done in private. It has to be to protect their own lives and to retain the purity of the esoteric search from corruption by "experts" and their modifications.

You are living in a romanticized fantasy. No one is threatening your life. What you call retaining the purity of the esoteric search is nothing more than being close minded and willfully blind even to the “experts” you rely on. You are unwilling to open your eyes and read Plato objectively. You assume you know him and so do not read him. You take passages and treat them as if they are the whole. What seems to support your beliefs you glom and close your eyes and your mind to the rest. You are not protecting anything but your cocoon, imagining a metamorphosis that will transform you into something beautiful.

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2017 3:55 pm Nick wrote:

Religious intolerance and secular intolerance are the same. Their gods are different. Religious intolerance features a personal god that defines your obligations for you. Secular intolerance worships the Great Beast as its god which defines your obligations for you. There is a minority who seek an alternative and are unwilling to just choose their god. They will be hated by advocates of both gods which is why when they gather in pursuit of realistic understanding it is always done in private. It has to be to protect their own lives and to retain the purity of the esoteric search from corruption by "experts" and their modifications.

Esoteric mysticism is not a substitute for academic philosophy, or for any other human endeavour that requires self discipline and native intelligence. You cannot take this short cut to knowledge the short cut of esoteric mysticism, and there is no philosopher of any academic standing who can support your undisciplined narrative.

You are wasting your time trying to fit your narrative to academic philosophy. In order to win the wisdom of academic philosophyneed to apply yourself and do some real work.You try to justify your laziness by appealing to your personal esoteric elevation. I would have thought that you would suspect your appeals to facile esotericism to be self deception. Like Fooloso4 I think you possibly have the native intelligence you'd need. There are several people in this group who could help you to advance, and in doing so you could also join in the fight against the worst excesses of the establishment.

The pursuit of legitimate esoteric paths doesn't deny facts. It develops a human perspective so that facts can become meaningful. Read this previously posted link comparing exoteric and esoteric reasoning. Read the chart. I assure you it is far more difficult to acquire the humility of a Jacob Needleman or a Basarab Nicolescu who expand their horizons than a Richard Dawkins type who lives in denial. Those like Greta and F4 seem to be lost and now can only live in denial. If you haven't lost it yet, contemplate the chart and honestly ask yourself if it is objectively offensive or if you are just reacting negatively out of habit.

http://www.kheper.net/topics/esotericis ... oteric.htm

fooloso4 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:06 pm Nick:

They will be hated by advocates of both gods which is why when they gather in pursuit of realistic understanding it is always done in private. It has to be to protect their own lives and to retain the purity of the esoteric search from corruption by "experts" and their modifications.

You are living in a romanticized fantasy. No one is threatening your life. What you call retaining the purity of the esoteric search is nothing more than being close minded and willfully blind even to the “experts” you rely on. You are unwilling to open your eyes and read Plato objectively. You assume you know him and so do not read him. You take passages and treat them as if they are the whole. What seems to support your beliefs you glom and close your eyes and your mind to the rest. You are not protecting anything but your cocoon, imagining a metamorphosis that will transform you into something beautiful.

Forget about arguing the New Man. You either agree with Plato's tripartite theory of soul or you don't. I do so the the problem of the human condition is that it has become unbalanced. We are no longer realistic and have become oblivious to objective human meaning and purpose. If you deny the tripartite soul and believe we are all balanced human beings only in need of secular education, then we have a basic disagreement. You will further secular indoctrination and I will further the conscious attempts to balance the human organism so as to become consciously realistic as opposed to an indoctrinated atom of the Great Beast.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:49 pm... become oblivious to objective human meaning and purpose..

What is objective human meaning? What purpose?
What exactly did you think you are talking about?

Nick:

You either agree with Plato's tripartite theory of soul or you don't.

This is a perfect example of your intolerance and closed-mindedness. It is only in the Republic that he uses this image of the soul. You take it out of context. One hint that it is problematic is that if everyone were just then there could be no classes or divisions within the city. Everyone would be ruled by reason. Do you think that Plato could not see this? There are various other problems raised in the Republic that call this division into question, but it would be a waste of my time and effort to go into it. Here’s one more hint: where does eros fit in? With a bit of honest, clear-minded thought, you will see that it cuts across the classifications. Okay, one more: look at the discussion about Leontius and the conflict in his soul about not being able to look away from the corpses, which occurs right after the question of of spiritedness is of the same nature as desiring (Republic 439e). And in line with the question of eros, we might also ask whether philosophy, the love of wisdom is also a kind of desiring.

I do so the the problem of the human condition is that it has become unbalanced.

Well, you certainly have provided ample evidence that your are unbalanced.

We are no longer realistic and have become oblivious to objective human meaning and purpose.

It is rather that you are unrealistic in imaging that you have any knowledge of objective human meaning and purpose.

If you deny the tripartite soul and believe we are all balanced human beings only in need of secular education, then we have a basic disagreement.

It is not an either or option. Not accepting this model of the soul, which plays no part in Plato’s other dialogues that discuss the soul, does not mean believing we are all balanced human beings. If one wishes to become more balanced it would be best to steer clear of your unbalanced mind, your obsessive compulsion and fixation on Great Beasts and secular intolerance.

You will further secular indoctrination and I will further the conscious attempts to balance the human organism so as to become consciously realistic as opposed to an indoctrinated atom of the Great Beast.

I do not further secular indoctrination. I emphasize the reading of primary texts in philosophy aided by secondary sources. I emphasize reading Plato, for example, not distorting him to conform to some uniformed, closed minded view. But of course in your mind that might mean secular indoctrination because what the philosophers teach is not what you believe.

Fooloso4 wrote:

I do not further secular indoctrination. I emphasize the reading of primary texts in philosophy aided by secondary sources. I emphasize reading Plato, for example, not distorting him to conform to some uniformed, closed minded view. But of course in your mind that might mean secular indoctrination because what the philosophers teach is not what you believe.

Nick seems to believe that he can fight injustice in a magical way . The best way to fight injustices is to understand the cultures from within them; this Nick cannot do as he has closed himself off from understanding what he calls the "secular".

Belinda:

You are wasting your time trying to fit your narrative to academic philosophy. In order to win the wisdom of academic philosophy need to apply yourself and do some real work.You try to justify your laziness by appealing to your personal esoteric elevation.

Good point. Of course Nicky will dismiss it by waving his hands and ranting about experts and secular intolerance, but it really comes down to whether one is willing to do the necessary hard work versus imagining one has attained a privileged perspective. The imagination’s construction of a mystical reality is almost effortless and as long as one keeps his eyes, ears, and mind shut he can imagine what his imagines is confirmed by his subjective feelings he calls objectivity.

I suspect that Nicky’s animosity toward academic philosophy has something to do with discovering at some point that one or more academic philosopher did not recognize what he thinks of as his own superior knowledge and understanding and rejected his uninformed opinions.The irony is that while disparaging academic philosophers he still cites them when what they say seems to confirm his beliefs.