What kind of philosophy do you enjoy the most?

Milktoast Bandit said:
I don't believe in beliefs...
Click to expand...

Do you believe in the I that you implicitly keep using to refer to your absence of belief in anything?

I don't know if you realise it but we are currently engaged in employing the Cartesian method of hyperbolic doubt to determine and trim down what can be established to exist with certainty... You, Milktoast, are a remarkable philosopher.
 
Cartesian 'I think therefore I am' now that's something that annoys me...the experiential basis of life and existence seems more compelling.
 
Roobarb&Custard said:
Cartesian 'I think therefore I am' now that's something that annoys me...the experiential basis of life and existence seems more compelling.
Click to expand...
I am, therefore I think...

I agree with that!

"Man is nothing else than what he makes of himself." Jean-Paul Sartre :) I would have added other genders in that equation, but I like the idea.
 
My training in dance and movement gives me a different interpretation, why not say I experience therefore I am, or I feel therefore I am? Our thinking since the enlightenment period seems a bit lopsided. But then I'm no expert so will probably not get much more drawn in here.:wink:
 
Roobarb&Custard said:
My training in dance and movement gives me a different interpretation, why not say I experience therefore I am, or I feel therefore I am?
Click to expand...

Here's an idea of why this might be difficult. How do you differentiate between experiencing and being?

It seems to me that being, or being-present, presupposes everything else. A lot of my writing is about this idea. I'm open to discussion though :) Do you have a lot of dancing experience?
 
Last edited:
Ren said:
How do you differentiate between experiencing and being?
Click to expand...

You don't, so there can be no checks and balances (in Science), it just is, but then that's Phenomenology isn't it, and closer to real life 'beingness'.
 
Last edited:
Roobarb&Custard said:
You don't, so there can be no checks and balances (in science), it just is, but then that's phenomenology isn't it, and closer to real life 'beingness'.
Click to expand...
That's close enough to my goal, actually :) I attempt something akin to a phenomenological description of the experience of a thunderstorm here.

I also think that in general, the suggestion of the experiential fundament of the I as simply being-in-the-world, is quite robust. But don't get me started on Martin Heidegger, because once I begin I never stop talking!
 
I bought 'Sophies World' many years ago to go over some basic Philosophy but never got round to reading it. I guess whenever I come across it it's by accident.
 
Roobarb&Custard said:
I bought 'Sophies World' many years ago to go over some basic Philosophy but never got round to reading it. I guess whenever I come across it it's by accident.
Click to expand...
But every accident in your life is an absolute opportunity for pure radical freedom, my dear Roobarb...

Okay I must stop speaking like a mad existentialist, haha! Actually, my ex girlfriend was a big fan of Sophie's World. She made me want to read it, though I never got around to either.
 
Ren said:
But every accident in your life is an absolute opportunity for pure radical freedom,
Click to expand...

I believe that and it is part of my Buddhist 'Humanist' Philosophy,
The Chinese character for crisis is the same for opportunity,- turning a crisis into an opportunity. Or as is referred to in the Lotus Sutra, 'turning poison into medicine', a principle which I have tried to use in my life and turn something negative into something positive. I think this seems similar to the principle you mention regarding 'radical freedom'.
 
Last edited:
Ginny said:
At the moment I'm obessed with the possible applications of the bricolage as described by Jacques Derrida
Click to expand...

@Milktoast Bandit doesn't believe in the questioner of questioners

We must rescue the Father from the depths
 
Ginny said:
@Milktoast Bandit Your disbelief is shocking! How do you get out of bed every day if you don't believe in anything? Or do you spend your days in bed w**king off, waiting for the apocalypse?
Click to expand...

Lol, @Ginny, I think you have this wrong but I'm sure @Milktoast Bandit will not be perturbed and is capable of defending himself!
 
Roobarb&Custard said:
Lol, @Ginny, I think you have this wrong but I'm sure @Milktoast Bandit will not be perturbed and is capable of defending himself!
Click to expand...

I was just having a little fun teasing him to elicit a response, is there something wrong with that? I thought he'd be able to handle it, he isn't usually so shy.
 
Ginny said:
I was just having a little fun teasing him to elicit a response, is there something wrong with that? I thought he'd be able to handle it, he isn't usually so shy.
Click to expand...
No not at all, of course not. I just thought it was a serious comment, lol! :smile:
 
Wyote said:
@Milktoast Bandit doesn't believe in the questioner of questioners

We must rescue the Father from the depths
Click to expand...
Thank you for this @Wyote it's always a great pleasure to listen to Derrida. Once I became more familiar with his vocabulary, the 'concept' of the trace, the questioning of the question about Being etc., I realised that he was actually a very systematic, borderline obsessive, thinker of great depth. I still have my issues with the metaphysics of absence, and with such weird notions as the nosegay, but listening to him always kicks me into wanting to write. Which is very healthy, I think.

@Milktoast Bandit, I believe our friend Michel Foucault also has decided to join in and call you back to philosophy:

ocLrVfo.jpg

:grin:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top