Philosophy Now Forum

Keeping in mind the general definition of the word "philosophy" -

"(n) - love and pursuit of wisdom thru intellectual means and moral discipline"

and so it is. philosophy ultimately leads to no answers but many unspoken questions. why? because we take the intellectual approach to realization, when those paths are but diversions from the ultimate causation of being. philosophy has the intellectual possibilities of mental exercise, but the essence of our true being must transcend the intellect and into the realm of mystery, the profound mystery of existence, the metaphysical realms and beyond...beyond the persistent questioning of mind.

mtmynd1

mtmynd1 wrote:Keeping in mind the general definition of the word "philosophy" -

"(n) - love and pursuit of wisdom thru intellectual means and moral discipline"

and so it is. philosophy ultimately leads to no answers but many unspoken questions. why? because we take the intellectual approach to realization, when those paths are but diversions from the ultimate causation of being. philosophy has the intellectual possibilities of mental exercise, but the essence of our true being must transcend the intellect and into the realm of mystery, the profound mystery of existence, the metaphysical realms and beyond...beyond the persistent questioning of mind.

mtmynd1

I hope you don't mind the following:

"The word "philosophy" comes from the Ancient Greek φιλοσοφία (philosophia), which literally means "love of wisdom"" --en.wikipedia.org--

"Philosophy
1. the rational investigation of the truths and principles of being, knowledge, or conduct." --dictionary.reference.com--

"Philosophy
1 The study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline." --www.oxforddictionaries.com--

"Philosophy
the study of ideas about knowledge, truth, the nature and meaning of life, etc. --merriam-webster.com--

And now the part you'll probably really hate, yet I mean no disrespect, it's just my version of your words:

"philosophy 'ultimately' leads to answers but currently only many unspoken questions. why? because we are still very young, in terms of that which we try and discern, so we can only offer an intellectual approach to realization that is current, and those paths are but elementary relative to the ultimate causation of being. philosophy is currently an intellectual mental exercise, and the essence of our true being must transcend the current intellect, leaving behind the realm of mystery, the current profound mystery of existence, the metaphysical realms and beyond...beyond the persistent questioning of mind to the final achievement of the actual knowing of mind, and all else."

That's the way I see your proposition. Though I'm sure we both could come up with a plethora of further permutations, and that all would have a certain degree of truth contained within them.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
That's the way I see your proposition. Though I'm sure we both could come up with a plethora of further permutations, and that all would have a certain degree of truth contained within them.

Thank you very much for your well-thought out and rational answer to my post, "Spheres"... I appreciate not only your reply but your gracious attitude.

Indeed, I think we're both right in what it is we visualize within the boundaries of philosophies and our viewpoints and right smack in the very middle lies the truth smiling at how closely we've gotten in such a short period of time.

I am of the belief that my own mind is but a tool to be used as such. To be put away when other situations find me with no need of mind. This happens during lovemaking, meditating, wordless observations that are not infringed upon by mind, even the joy gained by my own creative processes that seldom require the mind and rely on that which lies beyond mind. Here is where I have found numerable times a complete satisfaction that is without doubts, without any intrusion to simply 'Be". What a wondrous feeling that is be-yond explanation.

From personal experiences over the years, I have come to treasure such experiences knowing that what they offer is an invitation to return again and again to what has to be the very essence of metaphysics without being burden or bewildered by the definitions of such but to only bask in the experience itself.

Thank you once again, Spheres, and I trust you understand what I've put to words here... as incomplete as they may be, be assured allow mind to rest and experience that which is always on the other side awaiting our arrival.

mtmynd1

mtmynd1 wrote:because we take the intellectual approach to realization

LOL? This is wishful thinking, if you actually pulled your head out of your ass, you'll see like 99% of all posts being mere unqualifyed guess work, too many babblehead pouring out nonsense.

This is excatly why no buisness wants to hire philosophers or should I say ..cozy chatters? Even though that these buisnesses world wide spends billions upon billions in research, but philosophers doesn't have a fucking clue about anything.

Can they build a bridge? No they don't have a fucking clue!
Can they do a bypass operation? No they don't have a fucking clue!
Can they build a space rocket? No they don't have a fucking clue!
Can they build a house? No they don't have a fucking clue!

..all they know is scarse knowledge of some outdated philosophers, that's all..

HexHammer wrote:

mtmynd1 wrote:because we take the intellectual approach to realization

LOL? This is wishful thinking, if you actually pulled your head out of your ass, you'll see like 99% of all posts being mere unqualifyed guess work, too many babblehead pouring out nonsense.

This is excatly why no buisness wants to hire philosophers or should I say ..cozy chatters? Even though that these buisnesses world wide spends billions upon billions in research, but philosophers doesn't have a fucking clue about anything.

Can they build a bridge? No they don't have a fucking clue!
Can they do a bypass operation? No they don't have a fucking clue!
Can they build a space rocket? No they don't have a fucking clue!
Can they build a house? No they don't have a fucking clue!

..all they know is scarse knowledge of some outdated philosophers, that's all..

Where do I begin, HexHammer, with this incoherently written post of yours?

Let's begin with everything I have put into "bold" is either misspelled, misused or unnecessarily used which tells me a lot about you. The written language is not important to you but yet you seem to know what business is looking for in employees. I assure you that if your resume for employment came across my desk you would not be considered for any job.

Then you ask a series of questions -
1) "Can they build a bridge? "
2) "Can they do a bypass operation? "
3) "Can they build a space rocket? "
4) "Can they build a house?"

The "they" you repeatedly use implies anyone who is either a philosopher or someone who has a love of wisdom is unable to do any of these four tasks by themselves. Of course not, Hex... and neither could you perform any one of these tasks alone. But anyone who might be a philosopher or even someone who appreciates philosophy..? "They" are certainly capable of assisting in any one of these tests you have set out. Why not? All of these are group related jobs that requires several people, each trained in their specialties to complete any one of these. In particular, the first three tasks would entail a well-grounded education in these fields to safely perform their jobs... jobs that had to undergo an interview, a work resume and an education suitable to their jobs... which I failed to give you.

And the 3rd thing, Hex, that stands out is your attitude towards what you believe philosophers really are. I find this most peculiar given the fact that you have been hanging around these boards for some 3 1/2 years but yet have nothing good to say about any of us. Why hang around? Why bother to attempt to insult others when you quite clearly are not skilled in communications?

I'm not trying to be mean, HexHammer, but just bringing attention to how you appear which is ONLY thru your words. That is the problem with any internet site, we can only write our thoughts and not speak them or even show them. You and I and all the others are reduced to being writers to communicate with each other... and the more seriously we take our writing, the more serious we are to being understood. There are no real shortcuts to doing otherwise.

Think about that, HexHammer, the next time you reply to anyone not only on PN but any boards you might frequent. It will only make your comments more believable and that ain't too bad.

Now, take your own head out of your ass and see the light. Thank you.

Yes, you prove my point!

You as any cozy chatter doesn't know the concept of relevance and are busy digging in the wishful thinking and how to throw mud.

You haven't given just 1 real life example contradicting my claim that philosophers aren't in demand, but universities where they teach this outdated nonsense.

Or you could show me some posts where there's some million dollars answers that is suited for big businesses.

HexHammer wrote:Yes, you prove my point!

You as any cozy chatter doesn't know the concept of relevance and are busy digging in the wishful thinking and how to throw mud.

You haven't given just 1 real life example contradicting my claim that philosophers aren't in demand, but universities where they teach this outdated nonsense.

Or you could show me some posts where there's some million dollars answers that is suited for big businesses.

Mr. Hammer, it would surely 'seem' that you only frequent this forum to justify yourself in the face of wisdom. That is how you come off, as you harp the same old tune, i.e., 'philosophers can't do what I can do.'

And I'm sure that it's probably true that no one here, sought you out, prior to your first visit, and challenged your wisdom. So why come here to persecute those that enjoy philosophy, as in fact it's the father of all science, that which you cling to so adamantly. Is that what it is, do you feel subordinate?

Many, such as myself, see that it is the only discipline that has any kind of real potential in answering the big questions that encompass everything.

In all science, philosophy is in fact first, then comes the proof, while hindsight is always 20/20, making it easy for one who has learned what science has taught them, to say look at what I can do, no need to talk all cozy, and we have come full circle.

Philosophy was in fact the beginning to all, in which you owe, for your ability. And it shall always be the case, or science will have gone astray.

Humans current abilities and inabilities are in fact the culmination, in any particular 'now,' a resultant of 'all' their history.

Is there difference in the constituents that make up all of humankind? Of course, yet we are all on the same team, whether we like a particular constituent or not. Knowledge can be gleaned equally from the liked and not liked. Without dichotomy human kind is lost, having no direction, as one concept defines the other.

As I welcome your inclusion, I would ask that you try and mix it up a bit, so as to keep us interested in your thoughts.

Variety...

...The spice of life!

Ditto

mtmynd1 wrote:Keeping in mind the general definition of the word "philosophy" -

"(n) - love and pursuit of wisdom thru intellectual means and moral discipline"

and so it is. philosophy ultimately leads to no answers but many unspoken questions. why? because we take the intellectual approach to realization, when those paths are but diversions from the ultimate causation of being. philosophy has the intellectual possibilities of mental exercise, but the essence of our true being must transcend the intellect and into the realm of mystery, the profound mystery of existence, the metaphysical realms and beyond...beyond the persistent questioning of mind.

mtmynd1

I like this post, and I agree that we must explore the mystery that surrounds us.

mtmynd1 wrote:...
Let's begin with everything I have put into "bold" is either misspelled, misused or unnecessarily used which tells me a lot about you. ...

That English is not his first language and he's to lazy to use a spell-checker?

HexHammer wrote:...
You haven't given just 1 real life example contradicting my claim that philosophers aren't in demand, but universities where they teach this outdated nonsense.

Or you could show me some posts where there's some million dollars answers that is suited for big businesses.

Well, can't say they are million dollar answers but those questions are far and few between in the real world. So it may be small but philosophers of Logic are in fair demand in the research wings of Natural Language processing and AI and ethical philosophers are playing roles in the computer gaming industries knocking-up dilemma trees and scenarios, admittedly those with a fair background in Logic. Not surprising really as the one thing that is Philosophy's is Logic. The other place they are in demand is on Ethics committees.

Otherwise, and once more to the Hexhammer, no-one in Philosophy thinks they are in demand in business in the sense you wish them to be as Philosophy has long lost its place to Science but a good academic Philosophical education appears to open doors in quite a few occupations outside of University.

Arising_uk wrote:

HexHammer wrote:...
You haven't given just 1 real life example contradicting my claim that philosophers aren't in demand, but universities where they teach this outdated nonsense.

Or you could show me some posts where there's some million dollars answers that is suited for big businesses.

Well, can't say they are million dollar answers but those questions are far and few between in the real world. So it may be small but philosophers of Logic are in fair demand in the research wings of Natural Language processing and AI and ethical philosophers are playing roles in the computer gaming industries knocking-up dilemma trees and scenarios, admittedly those with a fair background in Logic. Not surprising really as the one thing that is Philosophy's is Logic. The other place they are in demand is on Ethics committees.

Otherwise, and once more to the Hexhammer, no-one in Philosophy thinks they are in demand in business in the sense you wish them to be as Philosophy has long lost its place to Science but a good academic Philosophical education appears to open doors in quite a few occupations outside of University.

I agree Arising_uk, and would add a question for HH: Let's say that what you say is true, I wouldn't necessarily know this because I have not taken the time to do the required research. And so here is the question, that dare I say, philosophy demands:

Does this quote of yours, bolded above, say more/less about philosophy or rather the current mindset of the populace. I mean to say that, does majority necessarily speak of what is right or what should be done, or what is less and should not be done?

And there goes dichotomy again, spelling out two opposing perspectives, a potential fork in the road. Is it want and desire that should rule, or rather need that should rule? And how do we, on the cutting edge of our understanding, chose which is which?

Thus philosophy 'tries' to ask 'all' the pertinent questions, so as to 'know' which is which.

Arising_uk wrote:Well, can't say they are million dollar answers but those questions are far and few between in the real world. So it may be small but philosophers of Logic are in fair demand in the research wings of Natural Language processing and AI and ethical philosophers are playing roles in the computer gaming industries knocking-up dilemma trees and scenarios, admittedly those with a fair background in Logic. Not surprising really as the one thing that is Philosophy's is Logic. The other place they are in demand is on Ethics committees.

Otherwise, and once more to the Hexhammer, no-one in Philosophy thinks they are in demand in business in the sense you wish them to be as Philosophy has long lost its place to Science but a good academic Philosophical education appears to open doors in quite a few occupations outside of University.

Thanks for enlighten me you have brought valuable information.

Imo the concensus what you say, is that philosophers are good at thinking up scenarios with relative values, and not definitive values like science thirst for.

But still it seems philosophy could be streamlined much more, do away with all the outdated philosophers and weird concepts like metaphysics.

HexHammer wrote: But still it seems philosophy could be streamlined much more, do away with all the outdated philosophers and weird concepts like metaphysics.

These so-called "weird concepts like metaphysics" goes to show how little thought you have given to such a subject. At your leisure, it may help you understand something about this subject by a simple 'google' search "Aristotle and metaphysics."

Philosophy, like any subject across the board, is certainly not for everybody, Hex, and apparently not your cup of tea. Don't be troubled by that but since the time you've spent on this board, surely you have gained something thru the various 'offerings' that are in play here on a 24/7/365 schedule..?

Metaphysics is not to confound you or any others but to at least begin a dialogue with like-minded folks about a subject they themselves enjoy talking about. There's not a subject on this forum that is out to change the world nor the halls of Universities world-wide by any means. It is what it is - a public forum provided by Rick Lewis who began the magazine, Philosophy Now, which has gained worldwide interest in the subject. But you know this. So where does this hostility come from..? Should we put it to philosophy to uncover it's source?

Hi Cecil