Is no philosophy better than any philosophy?

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Seattle, Dec 4, 2016.

  1. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    wellwisher, have you ever bothered to check the accuracy of what you post before you bother posting them? No? It might help stop you posting drivel if you do.

    For instance:
    This is a myth. That flat-earth was the prevailing view during the Middle Ages seems to have gained traction during the late 19th and early 20th century. But during the actual Middle Ages it seems to have been well known by any scholar of note that the earth was spherical, and have done in Western Europe since the theory was first arrived at (in Europe) by Ancient Greece. It never went away.
    Sure, the mass populace might have thought the earth was flat but then the mass populace were rather uneducated entirely to the point they wouldn't have had access to any information about anything at all. But the teachers and anyone who wanted to learn would likely have known that the earth was spherical.
    And given that you go on to talk about theories, you are clearly talking about scholars and not the mass populace.
    Please can you provide an example of a theory from the Middle Ages where flat-earth was a given?
    Just to correct you, you merely asserted it, you didn't show it to be the case.
    And what, pray tell, is "quantum determinism"? Are you going to redefine the term "determinism" to make sense of the phrase?
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Doreen Valued Senior Member

    If you mean it is ethically better than you are basing this on your moral philosophy. (you are also, likely, basing it on your epistemology, since you need a way to evaluate this claim). If you mean it is better in terms of knowledge, then you are basing this on your epistemological beliefs - again, your philosophy. It is being driven by your philosophy, even if you have not set that philosophy down on paper and worked it all out. All belief systems are based on philosophies, most handed down and complex (read: self-contradictory or with facets taken from different philosophies).

    though that statement seems rather absolute. Further it would also be based on some kind of philosophy of knowledge: one having deductive, empirical, or other components.

    The ways we, including you, decide on that answer are based on our philosophies. It is also a kind of false dichotomy.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. birch Valued Senior Member

    I know one of the worst and prevalent philosophies of life is ego based motives devoid of the consideration of the common good. Ironic that its natural selection but evidently devolution is just as valid as evolution.

    Very often people are motivated to tear down, subjugate, compromise, sabotage, undermine etc anyone with better qualities/abilities/ideas/potential so it's equalized or inferior. This short-sighted, self-centered ego based motive for competition actually inhibits or degrades quality rather than developing it in society.

    If you see another has a great ability, talent, idea, character trait etc, it should be something to admire and want more of in the world, not be viewed with malice, ill will or jealousy because you may not.

    I think that is also an indication of a good person or a 'evil' one as even good in the world is not one's priority or motive in life. So often, there is misplaced, dishonest or immature motives for actions such as personal glory, status or recognition that people will essentially cheat in various ways, including damaging competition. How can one be truly proud of oneself if it wasn't really earned legitimately or honestly? Why would one's motive be to get a nobel prize when the motive should be not the recognition but the mastery that may deserve recognition or respect when in truth what many people master is how to manipulate? Essentially people often operate and think in this way because deceit is so easy to hide in a physical world. It's actually rather stupid but petty amd even disingenuous motives is considered okay in society as long as it gets results fueled not by your true love or care but for the recognition or praise. Or pettily, anyone better at anything is something to be destroyed without considering what they may be destroying or damaging.

    Whenever i see good people make it, im in awe and it just restores some of my faith in humanity even if my face is eating dirt because it can be so hard when literally there are many proverbial devils in human suits wanting to bring you down for no good reason except they just don't care or consider what good they can do or are to make the world better but motivated soley by their personal ego and that is all life is about to them. If you are of the light or even a good person, there are people who even hate you for that or have ill will just because of ego rather than any consideration that its good for the world including them. That's how lame, depraved and selfish people can be.

    The world needs as many good/ethical people as well as those who strive for excellence as is possible. Even if you can't make it or have those abilities, good people admire and respect good period no matter who. You know, it's like the stereotype of the dirty politician among like sharks, can a honest and good politician make it? When they do, it's like a miracle. Whenever i see good triumph anywhere, it gives me hope and inspiration. Good people don't see it as something to be jealous of but to promote and encourage so the world can become closer to being heaven than the hell it is. As for your philosophy, what side are you on and what do you truly care about? The dark or light?
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2017
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. river


    Well said
  8. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    "There is on e good Knowledge, and one evil Ignorance." -Socrates.
  9. birch Valued Senior Member

    I like the philosophy our existence is an abstract idea run amok. Like the big bang was just one spark of a passing thought. It seems to be not much of a complete one. That way we dont take this temporal existence so seriously.

    Since the universe can be explained by math and the brain is configured to reflect it, that is more abstract than literal.

    Thats why the only thing thats left to give life meaning are metaphors. It may be that we are like scattered remnants/seeds of original consciousness.

    I think that whole notion of wanting to go back to source fits this idea. That its out there beyond the universe, not within it. Consciousness is derived from light and the universe is mostly dark. We're encapsulated. This darkness has confused, hindered and twisted some minds/consciousness.
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2017

Share This Page