|
|
#41
07-21-2005, 05:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Sartre\'s Contradiction
And I tend to agree with the last seven words. The rest awaits the results of the AI practitioners.
|
|
#42
07-21-2005, 05:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sartre\'s Contradiction
[ QUOTE ]
"Philosophers (the best anyway) are able to provide" Agreed. But the subject allows less than the best practitioners to go on with what they do without being exposed as incompetant. Thats my gripe. The same is true with many other fields of course. The difference is that everybody knows that about those other fields. To make it clear, I have no problem with people being philosophically minded. I just don't like it when the subject is made unnecessarily formal. [/ QUOTE ] Most of what you say is a fact. I started my frist year university in commerce only to transfer into philosophy so i could satisfy my inquiring mind. The philosophy professors were the sole reason why i dropped university all together midway through my 2nd year. This happened because i'd temporarily lost hope in intellectual competance. Far too many of those who are far from the best practioners go on and this alone is the biggest flaw in the field. Too many things are far to subjective and without a competant, objective leader, little can be accomplished.
|
|
#43
07-21-2005, 05:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sartre\'s Contradiction
Any notions of self, rights, liberty and freedom that you have are all results of philisophical thinking, as are all the political structures that control your life.
Non of the above concepts have any empirical truth and can not be proven in the labratory. God shmod who cares, philosophy has much bigger and much more relevant fish to fry. As I said a calculator is great at computation but is dumber than a snail. However much you say my claims about calculators are ridiculous it is intresting to observe that after machines replace the role of the labourer they are now replacing the role of the mathemetician in the industrial crucible. It will of course take machines much longer to replace higher functions of the intellect such as creative and incisive thought and thought for thoughts sake. The reason you should kill yourself is that you place no value in the thing that makes you unique, e.g. your subjectivity as you seek to render it pointless. When a man thinks mathematicaly he is turning his mind into an object, an object that must conform to universal rules to reach correct conclusions. That is why an other object (calulator) can replace this function, indeed an object superior (faster) at reaching the necessary conclusions. If you want to turn yourself into an object go for it, but objects are lifeless. So as I said might as well kill yourself. Subjectivity is our uniqueness. Animals have it too one might suppose, so what sets us apart from them. The quality of our subjectivity. That is why complex and subtle thought is the highest endevour of the human being, not for the result as in conclusions, but for the act itself. The act improves the quality of subjectivity. Whilst as you have said there are no transcendent purposes or truths (No god etc) the fact of our subjectivity is the reality of our existence. Being is the separation of thought and object. What you do with that subjectivity is upto you of course but if you chose to set your will to negating it than why exist in the first place? If you chose to make the most of it you will quilckly see that thought is important for thoughts sake. The purpose of existance is to exist but one does not do that merely by the act of drawing breath.
|
|
#44
07-21-2005, 07:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sartre\'s Contradiction
[ QUOTE ]
(Assuming poodles go to strip clubs.) [/ QUOTE ] This is the second or third time you've referenced strip clubs and/or getting laid in these otherwise existential discussions. Perhaps more effort with the former would cause you to worry less about the latter. It's like Cube said, "Life ain't nothin' but b**ches and money."
|
|
#45
07-21-2005, 10:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sartre\'s Contradiction
[ QUOTE ]
Any notions of self, rights, liberty and freedom that you have are all results of philisophical thinking, as are all the political structures that control your life. Non of the above concepts have any empirical truth and can not be proven in the labratory. God shmod who cares, philosophy has much bigger and much more relevant fish to fry. As I said a calculator is great at computation but is dumber than a snail. However much you say my claims about calculators are ridiculous it is intresting to observe that after machines replace the role of the labourer they are now replacing the role of the mathemetician in the industrial crucible. It will of course take machines much longer to replace higher functions of the intellect such as creative and incisive thought and thought for thoughts sake. The reason you should kill yourself is that you place no value in the thing that makes you unique, e.g. your subjectivity as you seek to render it pointless. When a man thinks mathematicaly he is turning his mind into an object, an object that must conform to universal rules to reach correct conclusions. That is why an other object (calulator) can replace this function, indeed an object superior (faster) at reaching the necessary conclusions. If you want to turn yourself into an object go for it, but objects are lifeless. So as I said might as well kill yourself. Subjectivity is our uniqueness. Animals have it too one might suppose, so what sets us apart from them. The quality of our subjectivity. That is why complex and subtle thought is the highest endevour of the human being, not for the result as in conclusions, but for the act itself. The act improves the quality of subjectivity. Whilst as you have said there are no transcendent purposes or truths (No god etc) the fact of our subjectivity is the reality of our existence. Being is the separation of thought and object. What you do with that subjectivity is upto you of course but if you chose to set your will to negating it than why exist in the first place? If you chose to make the most of it you will quilckly see that thought is important for thoughts sake. The purpose of existance is to exist but one does not do that merely by the act of drawing breath. [/ QUOTE ] vnh
|
|
#46
07-21-2005, 10:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sartre\'s Contradiction
[ QUOTE ]
Whilst as you have said there are no transcendent purposes or truths (No god etc) the fact of our subjectivity is the reality of our existence. Being is the separation of thought and object. [/ QUOTE ] Sartre, right? And don't you then end up with nihilism? In which case, as I tried to indicate in my London and Dostoevsky post, why not suicide, or murder?
|
|
#47
07-21-2005, 11:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sartre\'s Contradiction
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Any notions of self, rights, liberty and freedom that you have are all results of philisophical thinking, as are all the political structures that control your life. Non of the above concepts have any empirical truth and can not be proven in the labratory. God shmod who cares, philosophy has much bigger and much more relevant fish to fry. As I said a calculator is great at computation but is dumber than a snail. However much you say my claims about calculators are ridiculous it is intresting to observe that after machines replace the role of the labourer they are now replacing the role of the mathemetician in the industrial crucible. It will of course take machines much longer to replace higher functions of the intellect such as creative and incisive thought and thought for thoughts sake. The reason you should kill yourself is that you place no value in the thing that makes you unique, e.g. your subjectivity as you seek to render it pointless. When a man thinks mathematicaly he is turning his mind into an object, an object that must conform to universal rules to reach correct conclusions. That is why an other object (calulator) can replace this function, indeed an object superior (faster) at reaching the necessary conclusions. If you want to turn yourself into an object go for it, but objects are lifeless. So as I said might as well kill yourself. Subjectivity is our uniqueness. Animals have it too one might suppose, so what sets us apart from them. The quality of our subjectivity. That is why complex and subtle thought is the highest endevour of the human being, not for the result as in conclusions, but for the act itself. The act improves the quality of subjectivity. Whilst as you have said there are no transcendent purposes or truths (No god etc) the fact of our subjectivity is the reality of our existence. Being is the separation of thought and object. What you do with that subjectivity is upto you of course but if you chose to set your will to negating it than why exist in the first place? If you chose to make the most of it you will quilckly see that thought is important for thoughts sake. The purpose of existance is to exist but one does not do that merely by the act of drawing breath. [/ QUOTE ] vnh [/ QUOTE ] I tend to agree with the vnh comment. When I was deep into the study of higher mathematics I had a very strong sense of, as the king described, "When a man thinks mathematicaly he is turning his mind into an object, an object that must conform to universal rules to reach correct conclusions." It felt consuming, unbalanced, unnatural, and unhealthy to me. My mind was so submerged in the quest to calculate that there was no room left to dream. As for the transcendent, it seems to me that our subjective existence is what puts us in touch with the transcendent - and the immanent as well. PairTheBoard
|
|
#48
07-22-2005, 01:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sartre\'s Contradiction
I think you probably misinterpret my position. Maurile said it better than I:
"I wouldn't say that philosophy is unimportant; I'd say that, in general, full-time professional philosphers tend not to be very good at it. To paraphrase Richard Feynman, whenever some philosopher of science (as opposed to a scientist) says something about what is absolutely essential to the fundamental nature of science, it is always rather naive and probably wrong. IMO, if you want a solid, clear, logically consistent analysis of some philosophical issue or another, you'd be better off going to a mathematician instead of a philosopher." Your comments make me think, that you think, I believe something a lot stronger than the above.
|
|
#49
07-22-2005, 01:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sartre\'s Contradiction
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Whilst as you have said there are no transcendent purposes or truths (No god etc) the fact of our subjectivity is the reality of our existence. Being is the separation of thought and object. [/ QUOTE ] Sartre, right? And don't you then end up with nihilism? In which case, as I tried to indicate in my London and Dostoevsky post, why not suicide, or murder? [/ QUOTE ] Not Satre in particular, Nietzsche was the original god killer. However this is not nihilism quite the opposite. Nietzche hated nihilism. Think of it this way, what could possibly render human life more pointless than the existance of a Christian god. In that scenario we are little more than dogs with a master and have no control over out ultimate destiney. What point in living if to live is to simply obey the laws of our master or suffer the consequences. It is the fact that we must define ourselves through our actions without having recoure to transncedantal truths that is the basis of our freedom and liberty. It is the opportunity of man. In short it is the very reason to live and live fully.
|
|
#50
07-22-2005, 03:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sartre\'s Contradiction
[ QUOTE ]
What point in living if to live is to simply obey the laws of our master or suffer the consequences. [/ QUOTE ] This is a trivial view of Christianity. Without providing the Scripture verses but just speaking philosophically, the highest good for any creature is to accomplish its purpose, to be or become what its Creator intended. God created us so that we might love Him and enjoy Him forever - it's not a question of unwilling and slavish obedience but joyful fulfillment in the deepest possible sense. [ QUOTE ] It is the fact that we must define ourselves through our actions without having recoure to transncedantal truths that is the basis of our freedom and liberty. It is the opportunity of man. In short it is the very reason to live and live fully. [/ QUOTE ] This is existentialism which was taken to the extreme by Sartre, and is perhaps why that philosophy is no longer in vogue. It leads to the most depressing view of reality imaginable and is essentially unbearable and incapable of being consistently practiced.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
