This is the essence of 'our' dispute. I am not at home there. It's not sad, I am glad to be at home where science applies. And I don't want to be familiar with a subject where disagreements are at home. For anything else I simply post my experiences with my own humble methods and ideas. I have no claim to be conform with 'the nature of Philosophy'...each individual has a way to argue without to be validated by a Philosopher. And I am not dumb as you have confirmed. There are humans with wisdom and great reputations without to have studied Philosophy. And that is fine. Wisdom belongs not to Philosophers only. sid_16 and R29k have another opinion but they take my posts as they are and are still able to reply in a common way. Your claim for a 'proper debate' you will find at your colleagues, but I doubt you'll find a worthy one in the common society. Maybe that's the reason why Philosophers and 'the others' are so far away. Nevermind.
You're quite a jester... Science is nothing and going nowhere without disagreements! Humanity is nothing and going nowhere without disagreements! I will surmise that you actually understand neither Science nor Humanity, never mind Philosophy... No, but you are a German, after all... And you keep ignoring all the important/good stuff as per usual... Echhh... Errrmmmm, nope, it's not to be said that "we have to climb up to Science" but in Philosophy one can do whatever one wants and it's all equally valid and fine... The basis of the dispute is your ignorance and disrespect, a wrong stance/attitude towards Philosophy and Philosophers, as painfully obvious to anyone reading some of your lasts posts, which was apparent to me much earlier... That attitude is something that does not get any "respect" when it is turned to Science. And that says it all... Moreover, as I explained, you do have a "philosophy" - it's just that it's very, very poor... So, carry on spitting from on high... you're doing it to yourself, too... And I will continue to fight for Philosophy's dignity and recognition, as I will fight for one's talent and work done in the area, something I gladly give to other areas but the reverse is so obviously not the case way too often, in way too many ways to mention...
Oh, sure! that must be magical law, which doesn't need any scientific proof and can only be felt/seen by the magical thinkers with their third eye . Like we can discuss anything on any subject, from philosophy to ethics, from epistemology to science .... but the discussion will be diverted in to magical thinking, which doesn't need any logical/scientific proof but can only be felt by some renowned thinkers in this technical forums. Don't worry ! what more do I expect from you.
As any modern man I know, you have not the slightest idea what a jester is. You're wrong on this one. So wrong. Disagreement is just another EGO fight. LOVE is the engine that drives anything. You're supposed to be an expert on these subjects? OK. Yep! You're right on this one. Every man IS a philosopher. I know simple people that can make ANY modern philosopher cry any time and beat them with their own weapons. Are you serious on this one? Did you feel spit on? 'cause if you did, you have a serious ego problem...meditate on it. Why do you have to <fight> for something? Hmmm...let me tell you why: EGO. I wish all the love in the world to surround you, to open your eyes and to lift the drapes off, so you can see...
Socrate, I told you you're gonna do yourself an injury... Now look what you've done... Seeing how they (angels) are magic, no wonder they can travel at the speed of thought... Need I say more?!?
I have said that if we are mind identified we are living there where is past. I have tried to explain why.... Here is something that is for the scientific mind: http://www.salk.edu/news/pressrelease_details.php?press_id=31 They were even able to measure this gap, it are 80 milliseconds! 'The brain' waits until it has gathered enough information to be able to assign the perceived object to an idea which is past and over. (Remember: table and scaffold) But what is not mentioned is that there is a way of perception which allows to see the things as they are. This is the only way to live there where we can act, at present. At this state there is no perception of time. When one is totally aware of the present then things can be perceived without to have assigned an idea to them. They simply are. And I have described what changes then. The only way to evaluate this is to 'see the things as they are'. It needs constant awareness of the present, which takes effort (at the beginning), because we are comfortable to let do that the mind. It are our habits. To 'describe' this state one needs to refer to past ideas, hence there is no way to communicate it without to lose its originality. So when now referring to the topic and not to lose more time: I think is no verb. It is assigned to the past. I am is now. A past event cannot conclude the present. Hence Descartes ergo is not valid. I cannot ignore what I really am and that is all the stuff. It becomes good and bad in one's mind. To 'understand' would be nothing than to agree with an idea of it. I am science and science is me. poor, high, relations in your mind..... One has to, otherwise it would cause the death of the ego. And that's something the ego absolutely doesn't want. That what one is needs not to be defended and it contains all. All what needs to be defended is temporary. Here I am totally different. I am scientist, but I really don't have something to defend. People come to me to want to have it explained. Then I use my mind and its way to communicate. When studied science I have studied myself. Anything that seemingly has been learned had been there all the time. The study just has assigned it to pattern of the mind, to be able to be somebody who belongs to the scientists...to be able to communicate via established complexes of thoughts. Feel free to think about, no teaching. If you want to know if there is something 'true' then you need to make effort. It is all about to break the habits of the mind. If not then just take it as entertainment.
So are Martians, btw... Yen, you really are clueless when it comes to philosophical thinking. Sorry but it's so obvious to me... And to you... oh, well, your ego would not let anything else in, including creativity, imagination and the rest of the best of us... Fear, I think/feel...
You are right. I am clueless when it comes to philosophical thinking. But I refer to a state where are no thoughts. Creativity happens when one does not refer to thoughts. Or do you think one can be creative when remaining at already defined patterns? How is one when being creative? Isn't one in unity with that what one creates? And isn't the moment of creation timeless? Isn't the 'solution' there where there are no thoughts? How do you define the state of creativity? Is it evaluating of thoughts? Curious about your sight of the matter...
How did you come to the conclusion that ALL thoughts are defined patterns, thoughts can be downright weird ? Creativity requires thoughts, it does not simply happen by magic. As the saying goes Creativity is 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration. I really thought you were a bit smarter than Socrates.
Yen, creativity does not happen in vacuum. It rests on so much we have already learnt/absorbed. Remove thoughts and you are left with a baby, at best - or an animal... [Methodically speaking, we are between animals and "God". God is his/her thoughts, a unity...] In Science/Technology or Philosophy, things/ideas have to be expressed in words, in order for them to be verifiable etc. In your "thinking", remove all your thoughts and you may talk of Zen or Nirvana, "inner peace"... But creativity is not inner peace! Quite the opposite. And we are Future, at that moment! Essentially future! Novum! Sure, we build in relation to "previously already seen" but essentially the novum comes from the future, through this tension between what is and what might/ought to become!
Socrate of2012, your responses consistently demonstrate the arrogance that only ignorance provides. Instead of repeating factually incorrect claims of one or another fallacy, it would be better to actually try to understand the positions you avoid. Your strategy certainly appears gratuitously combative with the intent to prolong the debate for its own sake rather than promote, defend, or critique any particular idea or point of view in this thread.
The problem is that Yen sir, you don’t actually point out your own errors. What you do is either to assert that there are errors with no actual errors elucidated, or to engage in straw man fallacies of such obviousness that nobody is willing to waste much time rebutting them. (e.g. So when now referring to the topic and not to lose more time: I think is no verb. It is assigned to the past. I am is now. A past event cannot conclude the present. Hence Descartes ergo is not valid.). Furthermore, when it is pointed out earlier to you that you are misreading your own error , you ignore the evidence and repeat the same erroneous conclusions you made before.
First of all,i suggest you all here:Yen,Socrate,Gorsky,Sid and R29k watch a episode of -The Muppets Show-to cool down the overheated heads of yours and talk normally to each other here,especially Mr.Gorsky(Znam sve najbolje) It´s getting a little violent in this thread that started peacefully and now is turning to a 2 sided nation war.(Germans vs Balkans) Well i don´t see any unnormal thinking here from Mr.Socrate,if he believes in angels than let him do it. Sure there is no proof of them,but there is no proof that they don´t exist either. I don´t see any arrogance from socrate,he is just writing what he believes. I´ll just say this: "The whole world is full of magical things waiting for our wits to grow sharper" and this: A smart man,who recognizes the whole world is just an illusion,does not act as it is real,so he escapes the suffering!!!!!! Live today,not Yesterday,not Tomorrow.Just today.Inhabit your moments.Don´t rent them out to tomorrow. Imagination is the beginning of creation.You imagine what you desire,you will what you imagine,and at last you create what you desire.
60Cent wrote; Is not it the fact that someone may claim to know something and then turn out to be wrong show that no one knows anything? If we only thought we knew it, and it turns out to be false, then, of course, we did not know it in the first place. So my question is whether this fact, that sometimes what we think we know we do not know shows that we can never know anything as many skeptics seem to have claimed. Or, alternatively, that we do know things, but that since we can never be sure that what we think we know is true (for it can always turn out to be false) that kind of knowledge need not be true.
I am taking the mickey, 60cents, out of both "traditions" (out of the worst of those two places, just so there is no misunderstanding... yet again...) - there is nothing "versus" about it... If I am taking the mickey out of "my own" and if I "can laugh at my own expense", so to speak, then what the hell is going on in this reply of yours?!? Can you not laugh at your own expense? I mean, whomever can't - my severe condolences!!! For crying out loud... these faulty telephone chit-chats?!? P.S. I can direct you to some good literature on "Imagination and creativity", if you are interested. Just don't try to teach me about it, please... I have had one too many laughs in the thread already - gonna pee myself...
For gods sake the first part was just a joke and i know this ain´t a war. Don´t you understand what is supposed to be fun???? To your P.S. I didn´t try to teach you i merely wrote something based on "Imagination and creativity",because i can´t imagine myself a person on this earth that is possible to teach people from (balkan) your smart enough and will probably get what i mean with that,if not than it´s bad,cause i can´t write it here... Thanks for trying to direct me to some good literature on "Imagination and creativity",but no,i´ve read some books and stuff about that and i´m very well informed. I´m more out of your tradition,but lived where Yen is and much more places around the old continent,so it all got badly mixed up,example:Most germans don´t like joking around and i´m from the sort that can´t stop with jokes and there you´ve got your salad,only conflicts. P.S.sid-16 i think i´ll reply to you little later don´t have time now
Try professor Rudi Supek... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudi_Supek http://www.amazon.com/MASTA-RUDI-SUPEK/dp/B004HB0PQ2