The Immense Power of Philosophy and the Mind

[grannymh]

Hey. I am feminine. As such I can “make up mind” any way, any time I wish.

This is not an insult. But I am wondering why your post sounds more coherent than others I have tried to read. Why does “New World Order” ring a bell?

Correction to post 19

I left out the words “on other threads”. My apology, James S Saint, I wasn’t referring to you.

 

[Oreoracle]

The goal of the professor in my philosophy survey class was to show the direct line from Descartes to Communism. Along the way there were some strange philosophies about how to tell if one existed or if there were really reality. The professor proved his point and I passed the course trying not to laugh out loud.

Since then, it seems as if philosophy has gotten crazier. Now, when I want to get out of a philosophy discussion, I post something like --The author I was reading couldn’t figure out if he existed. So he tried to figure out if he at least existed in someone else’s imagination. I preferred to stick with the older philosophers who knew which end was up.

What have you been reading? In my experience, the older philosophers were typically nuttier. When Plato saw a cat, he apparently couldn’t figure out if he was looking at an animal or a specific expression of the Form of Cat. Pythagoras was pretty strange with his rationalism as well. “If it can’t be understood or quantified, it must not be real!” That’s a pretty arrogant assertion for an ancient Greek philosopher, is it not? And let’s not forget Aristotle’s dismissal of atomic theory.

 

[grannymh]

What have you been reading? .

Mostly conclusions and results.

The paths taken to conclusions, as you pointed out, can be full of nutty pot holes. Thus, at times, I am more interested in the conclusion than the path to it.

My bias favors philosophical conclusions which keep my human nature intact instead of separating me according to Cartesian dualism and then discarding a portion according to materialism based on the evaluation of relativism.

Come to think of it, my favored philosophies could also be part of modern ones. Note to self: Don’t assume that reasonably reasoned philosophy can only be found in ancient philosophies.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Both philosophers and scientists have trouble getting over the hump that grows between the understanding of the brain and the understanding of the mind.

I think the best people to listen to concerning that sort of concern would be those who have designed from scratch computer processors (thus getting the basic idea of the mechanics) and also have studied psychology and perhaps a little meta-physics/religion.

It takes a combination of those skills to bring the whole picture together.

But then if you want to understand what such people say, you might also request that they are talented in writing skills (which leaves me out).

 

[James_S_Saint]

Hey. I am feminine. As such I can “make up mind” any way, any time I wish.

No wonder then why the light from my window keeps going from light to dark and back again.

I am wondering why your post sounds more coherent than others I have tried to read.

I suspect that has more to do with the heart than the mind. We talk with our minds, but listen with our hearts (not always a good thing).

 

[grannymh]

I suspect that has more to do with the heart than the mind. We talk with our minds, but listen with our hearts (not always a good thing).

Maybe we should listen with our minds and talk with our hearts. That might be the philosophy of “real power.”

 

[James_S_Saint]

Maybe we should listen with our minds and talk with our hearts. That might be the philosophy of “real power.”

But to try to be what you cannot be would not be very “real”.

Perhaps if we both talk and listen with BOTH mind and heart, we could bring all into harmony.

{but of course, then you would be doing as my signature suggests. )