How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 Can Anyone Other Than A Recluse   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Can Anyone Other Than A Recluse

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


25 posted 07-12-2008 02:18 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
I hope I'm making myself clearer here.


Not really.

All you seem to be doing Bob is explaining how we modify our behaviour to match societies expectations. Thatís a given, nobody, as far as I know, is arguing that that isnít the case, the question is whether the persona projected due to that modified behaviour is a true representation of the ďselfď.

I donít think it is.

Iíd go further in fact - I donít think anything thatís modified can be taken as a true representation of anything.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


26 posted 07-12-2008 02:46 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Look at the man if you want to see the man.  Look at the man's deeds if you want to see his deeds.  But if you look at the man himself as if it is to look specifically at his deeds, or the deeds to look at the man, then you might as well try to look at a spot of the ground to see the whole sky or a part of the sky to see the whole ground, too.  

The only safe evidence you may judge a human himself is by his human body/soul presence itself.  And even that will be for the most limited and mostly physical.  "He is human" "he is tall, short, big, small, hairy, bald, etc".  Any attempt to measure the man morally (good/evil) will fail to have any evidence in the man himself.  For whenever you say he is "good" or "bad" that will only correspond to judging a deed or (part of a) condition, not the human himself nor as a whole.


Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


27 posted 07-12-2008 03:08 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

Thatís fine if youíre looking at a man, his deeds, the ground or the sky but where do you look if you want to see his true self Ess?

Come to think of it donít answer that - Iíve had a sudden urge to think about something else completely and Iím going for it.


Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


28 posted 07-12-2008 04:07 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Iíd say that at twelve he was being himself and at thirteen he was influenced by outside forces to amend his behaviour - to alter his ďselfĒ to fit the requirements of social interaction. His true self hasnít changed, only his projected persona is amended - his mask if you like or his convenient fiction.

Many times, Grinch, I think that's probably true. If the thirteen-year-old punches people any time he thinks he can get away with it, any time he believe there will be no consequences, then yea, I'll agree he didn't really change. Do you honestly believe, though, that fear of consequences is the only way society amends behavior?

The person who gives in to an urge and the person who denies the urge are NOT the same self -- even if they had exactly the same urge. To me, that seems to be entirely self-evident?

quote:
Iíd go further in fact - I donít think anything thatís modified can be taken as a true representation of anything.

Do you know of anything, Grinch, that has never been modified? I sure don't.

Which is the true self? The one who gives in to his urge to eat dinner or the one loosening his belt before finally leaving the table?

quote:
A man himself is what he is, not what he does.  He is a being, not an act.

So all men are identical, Essorant?

quote:
Look at the man if you want to see the man.  Look at the man's deeds if you want to see his deeds.  But if you look at the man himself as if it is to look specifically at his deeds, or the deeds to look at the man, then you might as well try to look at a spot of the ground to see the whole sky or a part of the sky to see the whole ground, too.  

I think you need to work on those analogies, Ess.

quote:
The only safe evidence you may judge a human himself is by his human body/soul presence itself.

The soul is God's province, Ess, not mine. However, even though I think your logic is seriously flawed, you have nonetheless hit on a real truth. Full knowledge of self, like the soul, is likely reserved for divinity, not humanity. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try, though.


Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


29 posted 07-12-2008 06:49 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Essorant.  You may be completely correct, you may be wrong.  The statement is about a black box.  We have some idea about what goes in and we have some idea about what come out.  We can talk about electricity and structure and anatomy and chemistry and behavior, but I don't believe any of these things add up to what you mean by what a man is.  Please correct me if I'm wrong here.

     We're struggling to talk about an abstraction called "the self." This may be what you're talking about or it may not be, but unless you say so, how can I, at least, have any idea of where you're coming in on the discussion.  I don't mind you coming in anyplace at all, I simply want to be able to talk with you and not past you.  I feel that you've talked past me here.

     Let me take a shot at responding to what I think you may be saying.  If I'm wrong, again, please correct me; I don't want to talk past you if I can help it.

     Plainly if "being" weren't important to you, you wouldn't have chosen "Essorant" as a name here. (I chose to use the double negative because it seems less fussy and as clear as other constructions.  Sorry to all grammar wonks.)  I'm pretty much clear that being and behavior may be a useful philosophical distinction.  In pragmatic terms, if you lie, cheat and steal, your being is of no particular interest to me; I will try to avoid getting tangled-up in the mess you apparently generate for yourself and the people around you and will offer what compassion I can offer without ruining the people I can do good for and to the extent you can accept it.  Maybe at some future time we will be able to work more happily together.  

     I'm not always a pragmatic guy, but I make an effort.

Best from LA, Essorant, Yours, Bob K.    
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


30 posted 07-12-2008 08:04 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Essorant, what a person does flows directly from what he "is".  That's why we lose respect for some one who pays us an insult, because we intuitively know that the insult is not a detached accident aloof from his person.  I don't think you can so neatly separate the two without reverting to some kind of platonism.

Of course I differ from Grinch in that I'm sure the self is not merely the sum total of a conflicting bundle of desires and actions, though such actions are determinite of the character of one's self or soul.  Perhaps it is similar to the way in which a particular number of particular words can never make a good story.


Stephen  
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


31 posted 07-12-2008 09:46 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


Not really.

All you seem to be doing Bob is explaining how we modify our behaviour to match societies expectations. Thatís a given, nobody, as far as I know, is arguing that that isnít the case, the question is whether the persona projected due to that modified behaviour is a true representation of the ďselfď.

I donít think it is.

Iíd go further in fact - I donít think anything thatís modified can be taken as a true representation of anything.


Dear Grinch,

          Oooooo-Kay.  Lets look at it another way.  Unless a child when born is accepted pretty much on the spot into an active mothering dyad, a society of two, the kid dies.  I say mothering because it can be a dad, it can be a sister, it can be any of many different people as long as there develops on the mothering end what's called primary maternal preoccupation.  On some level the nurturing person has to feel that kid is the greatest thing since air; and that person has to act, in a "good enough" fashion, as if s/he were not so much a person but a primary substance to that child, as utterly dependable as gravity.

     The two of them learn an elaborate language of gesture and sound that's got contributions from the genetic past but also has elements of mutual invention.  The child teaches the mother in some ways as much as the mother teaches the child. It's in large part an improvised ballet.  Within those bounds, there cannot be said in any psychological sense that there is  a clear boundary between mother and child, and it is out of this matrix that the self of the child emerges.  

     Now my question for you, Grinch, is what age is your true self?  And why have "You" decided to put it there.  And who are "You?"  You are apparently somebody who has no right to speak for your "self" and yet seems to rattle on endlessly as though there was nothing wrong with that.  I have no particular problem with me being me.  You on the other hand question your credentials.  I can do no more than to, for the sake of the discussion, take your point of view, and demand that you present your right to talk authoritatively for the Guy I know as Grinch.  

     I have been perfectly willing to accept that you've had the right to speak for him until this point, but now you tell me that you are a phony, a dupe foisted on Grinch by the evils of society.  You apparently find the price you pay to live among the rest of us too expensive to pay and you resent paying it.  It's our fault for forcing you to pay.

     I say, show your credentials for having any right to speak at all for Grinch!  Chose what you are willing to say and what price you are willing to pay and own your choice.
If you claim to speak for the Real Grinch, speak up or acknowledge you are the real Grinch or convince me that there's some reason you have the right to speak for somebody you say you aren't.  Acknowledge that those thoughts and feelings and impulses are a part of who you are now and are valuable but aren't the only authentic thing about you.

     Since you claim you aren't authentic, now is the time to give an authentic answer.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


32 posted 07-12-2008 09:48 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Ron,

         Nice system!  It does work more quickly.  Thank you so much.  BobK.
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


33 posted 07-12-2008 10:20 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Well, whoever I am, I seem to be more confused when I read this thread than when I don't.



And Bob? I was a "failure to thrive" kid, according to some diagnoses. They told my mom that and it pist her right off into mothering me.

*shrug*

We spend a lot of time apologizing to each other these days...

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


34 posted 07-13-2008 02:44 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Grinch
quote:

There are several options Bob, two of which are that your true self is the outward persona as seen by others which is based on what choices you make another is that itís a culmination of the urges that come freely which instigate those choices. Unless youíre suggesting that the urges you get arenít spontaneously derived from yourself, that they are somehow generated by another, I donít see how you can deny that they are true reflections of yourself.



     I don't deny that that are true reflections of "the self."  My quarrel is with the notion that they are the only true reflections of the self.  The suggestion that "the self" must be antisocial makes zero sense to me.  You've seen my above posting, Grinch.  If you're not Grinch, identify yourself and stop using somebody else's name.  If you are Grinch, why not speak for yourself?  If the discussion is a waste of time around a pseudo issue, say so and let's move on.

    

    And Serenity, same thing with me, more or less.  As you might tell from the tone of my postings, sometimes, I've always had to work on my empathy with people, and I've not always done so well.  I do try to be clear, don't want to be obscure, but some days I think it isn't such a bright idea to get out of bed.  At least I generally get my own jokes, though I confess they aren't always all that funny.
I need to hire classier writers.


Grumble grumble grumble, BobK.

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


35 posted 07-13-2008 03:16 AM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

BobK?



(and btw? I work cheap.)



grins
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


36 posted 07-13-2008 05:02 AM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

I thought about it, and I should have said:

"whomever" I am....



I might be 'him'!

(are we there yet?)
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


37 posted 07-13-2008 09:07 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Apparently I congratulated Ron early.  I wuz confozzled, cofounded and cornfuzed, what can I say.  Still, it's good to be in a functional environment, and I swear that thinmgs were operating more swiftly when I said something.  Shows what I nose.  Mr. Bob.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


38 posted 07-14-2008 03:07 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

quote:
So all men are identical, Essorant?


Yes, we are all copies of the same identity: Human.  We are just mutated a little from one copy to another.  


quote:
soul is God's province, Ess, not mine. However, even though I think your logic is seriously flawed, you have nonetheless hit on a real truth. Full knowledge of self, like the soul, is likely reserved for divinity, not humanity. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try, though


I don't have any problem with judging men, for we are all the same things: human bodies.   Anything else about us is not what we ARE, but what we DO.

quote:
We're struggling to talk about an abstraction called "the self." This may be what you're talking about or it may not be, but unless you say so, how can I, at least, have any idea of where you're coming in on the discussion.  I don't mind you coming in anyplace at all, I simply want to be able to talk with you and not past you.  I feel that you've talked past me here.


Yes, I am talking about the "self" in the sense of what someone truly is.   Oneself is simply a human body!  He is a human body pretending that he is an image of God, or a compendium of the Universe.  A human body pretending that his wealth  is a "limb"or an extension of himself.  Or a human body pretending to be a personification of something else or some compilation of his deeds.  

A human body often pretending to be much more:   That is the true Self.


quote:
That's why we lose respect for some one who pays us an insult


I don't lose respect for someone that tries to kill me, let alone insult me.  I disrespect the act, but I still respect the person.

It is called doing what is right, despite what is wrong.  A man's deeds may be wrong, but the man himself is not.  I respect someone, even if he disrespects me.  Disrespecting someone only augments the displacement of disrespect, directing it toward people, instead of a bad manner such as disrespecting people in the first place.
 

[This message has been edited by Essorant (07-14-2008 03:40 PM).]

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


39 posted 07-14-2008 04:17 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
I don't have any problem with judging men, for we are all the same things: human bodies.   Anything else about us is not what we ARE, but what we DO.

You can't have it both ways, Essorant.

Either we're human bodies or we're what we are -- elemental particles sloughed off by a long forgotten giant star going super-nova. What we ARE is little different than the rocks and air and water around us. The only thing that makes us different, Essorant, the only thing that defines a self at all, is what we do.

I am in full agreement that there is an important distinction between a man and a man's actions. However, we can't put a man's actions in jail so that we can protect society from them. Separating your judgment of a man and his actions is great -- until you want to actually DO something about those actions. You can neither reward nor punish actions; those are necessarily reserved for the person. In my mind, the distinction is most appreciable only when you want to condemn the actions but forgive the man. That's an important distinction, I'll grant you. It does not, however, help us define the Self.


Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


40 posted 07-14-2008 05:18 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


Dear Essorant,

          It's very nice to draw a distinction between being and action.  I'm glad you can disapprove of the action and love the man.  I too believe that a person can be suffering and his actions may be a distorted representation of his being.  Perhaps he is ill.  Perhaps his being is trapped in illusion.

     But I think you may have difficulty in saying "the self" is the body.  You run into problems with questions about people who have been injured.  If I have lost an arm, have I lost "my self."  Or am "I" still here.  How about the loss of a leg?  Have I lost my self then?  If I have, would that be a proportional loss of self, depending on the body part, in the same way that an insurance policy functions?  What happens if I'm paralyzed at any particular level so I may have no experience of body.  What happens if I'm in a sensory deprivation chamber?  Surely you can see where I'm going here.  


     Say you are communicating with a machine, and the machine is communicating back.  You believe you are talking to somebody named BobK.  Yet you are aware of Turing tests.  Is this "BobK" a real person with a "self" or is he a machine?  Other than sounding a bit wordy, he sounds almost human.    Does he have a body and thus an Essorant approved "self" or not?   How would you know?  Especially if you're not going to get circular and depend on your definition to prove your definition is correct?

     There are centuries if not millenia of meditations about the ego that lead one back and back from "I am not this body"  (because it changes constantly and decays, yet that is not my experience of my self) through I am not my relationships and I am not my wealth and I am not my success to I am not this train of reasoning and ends with "I am not this thought."


     And as I said above a few numbers back in this thread, If a guy lies to me or cheats me, that may be his behavior, and I may forgive him for it, but I have also been led to make a decision about the being that's at the wheel in there.  I call myself "experienced" for having done so.  

     Essorant, if you tell me that you're going to plunk down your kid's college money to buy shares in this guy's new scheme to air- condition the whole of the Amazon basin with zero point energy and your dog's old frisbees, I would be somewhat on the surprised side.  I think of you as being "experienced" as well.

     If you tell me that his old actions forbid you from believing in his new plan, I would ask you to distinguish for me how that differs from deciding the guy himself isn't to be trusted.  Is there some way it can be distinguished by a well-meaning outside observer?  Because I haven't come up with a way yet.

     Perhaps there's some idea here I'm not getting.  I'm open if it seems to cover the bases.

Best, BobK.  Click,  Click.  Clink.
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


41 posted 07-15-2008 12:48 AM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Essorant,

We are more than just "human bodies".  I work in an ICU where we carry alot of those to the morgue for disposal (however reverent or ceremonious).  And judging from the reaction of families, they know their loved one is "absent", though the body remains.  Whether you want to call it self or soul, or even actions (though I think the sum of actions is still just shy a who a person is), there is more than the body.

Stephen
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


42 posted 07-15-2008 01:16 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Essorant,

          Not a particularly believing man myself in many ways, but I've seen the same thing as Stephanos.  So, yeah, what he said.  BK.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


43 posted 07-15-2008 04:15 AM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

quote:
You can't have it both ways, Essorant.

Either we're human bodies or we're what we are -- elemental particles sloughed off by a long forgotten giant star going super-nova.


I don't see the problem, Ron.  A sandcastle is both sand and the castle at the same time, likewise a human is a human and also the elements he is composed of.   One condition doesn't vacate the other.

The difference with our deeds though is that they aren't literally what make us, they are simply what we do with the force that the elements enable us to have and help maintain ourselves with in the first place.   What we do is important, but what we are is even more important.  If we weren't ourselves: humans, to begin with, we wouldn't have such abilities.   Being "bodies" is not a trivial thing.

quote:
However, we can't put a man's actions in jail so that we can protect society from them. Separating your judgment of a man and his actions is great -- until you want to actually DO something about those actions. You can neither reward nor punish actions; those are necessarily reserved for the person


I agree.  But we can still protect and help all men.  We can protect society from the man's harmful deeds, and protect the man from his harmful deeds, as much as possible.  In other words, we work for all men against evil, instead of against any man because of evil.  And that is the way it ought to be.

quote:
But I think you may have difficulty in saying "the self" is the body.  You run into problems with questions about people who have been injured.  If I have lost an arm, have I lost "my self."  Or am "I" still here.  How about the loss of a leg?  Have I lost my self then?  If I have, would that be a proportional loss of self, depending on the body part, in the same way that an insurance policy functions?  What happens if I'm paralyzed at any particular level so I may have no experience of body.  What happens if I'm in a sensory deprivation chamber?  Surely you can see where I'm going here.


I don't think one loses himself, but loses a part of oneself.  Sometimes a more important part, sometimes a less important part, but nevertheless it is still a part of oneself.  


quote:
Say you are communicating with a machine, and the machine is communicating back.  You believe you are talking to somebody named BobK.  Yet you are aware of Turing tests.  Is this "BobK" a real person with a "self" or is he a machine?  Other than sounding a bit wordy, he sounds almost human.    Does he have a body and thus an Essorant approved "self" or not?   How would you know?  Especially if you're not going to get circular and depend on your definition to prove your definition is correct?


For sure.  Communication may only take place with something that has a body that enables it to communicate in one way or another, therefore I know it has a body, and therefore a "self"   A rock also has a body, but the body doesn't enable as much communication    


  
quote:
If you tell me that his old actions forbid you from believing in his new plan, I would ask you to distinguish for me how that differs from deciding the guy himself isn't to be trusted.


The difference is working against the actions (the problem) instead of the man.  If you express that you are against a thing he does, that is much different than expressing you are against him or think that he himself is the problem.  

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


44 posted 07-15-2008 01:25 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Stephanos, Bob,

I think the truth is that the body/self changes so much that it no longer has the ability to live anymore.   The harsh reality of death is not the absence of the self, but the presence of the difference that the self/body is no longer able to live.

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


45 posted 07-15-2008 05:00 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

*raising my hand*

Now this is all very interesting to me. Seriously, it is.

So what I want to know is how do you guys suggest someone go about assessing who they are? If part of emotional maturity is taking an honest inventory of our own actions, owning responsibility and attempting to rectify past "sins", or at the least apologize to those we have offended, then I think we have to at least consider the part of our identity that is reflected back to us by others, doncha think?

AND--if we go a bit further, then I think we have to conclude that the person we are is also a result of past imprinting (nods to BK) as well as current reactive behavior (creatures of habit?) as a result of that imprinting and dare I include a seed of hope for the person we would like to become?

A few platitudes?

"Hate the sin, but love the sinner."

Okay. I get that. And I sure hope I get that compassion as well, but on the other hand? When we need to entrust someone, don't we

"Judge them by their fruits?"

and I probably have more questions, but right now I'm just wondering where the hell John went off to?  

My apologies to John if my familiarity with folks makes him uncomfortable, too. John? There's just something about that picture of you that brings out the "tickle monster" in me. (A form of torture, I know.   )

And BobK? I like you, I truly do. Sometimes my humor doesn't translate in print, so if my little smilie rolling on the floor in laughter seemed like mockery, I do apologize to you as well.


I forgot a few platitudes:

"You can't judge a book by it's cover."

and

"You can judge a man by the company he keeps."

I was interested in what John had to say about the book thing, since he once quite honestly confessed that obese people made him feel uncomfortable. Now, since I just read about a woman who had a 140 lb. tumor removed, I'm curious to see if that proclivity has changed. (And btw? I'm guilty of the same thing, but just the opposite. When I see people so thin I can see their bones? I just wanna feed 'em--I equate "thin" with illness.)

I've also kept some questionable company...

so yep, I'm curious as to what you all think about this. Thanks in advance!
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


46 posted 07-15-2008 05:30 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Essorant,

          Your use of parallelisms and paradoxical language muddies your point for me, while it makes the language more interesting.  In poetry, I like both.  

     In conversation, my preference is that the flowers be accompanied by dinner:  After my senses are intoxicated, I'd like something to chew over and digest, something that satisfies my hunger for information and discourse.

     I refuse to believe that a man who can teach himself Hebrew isn't focused enough to put his meaning into English plain enough for me to follow.  Please.  When everybody talks so cleverly, I tend to miss the point, and these philosophical conversations get pretty involved.  It's not that I'm so down home when I write, mind you, but it's generally helpful for me to explain myself when folks don't follow me either.  It makes me think things through in different language.  Sometimes that changes my thinking a bit.

     For example, in thinking about your point, Essorant, as I was writing an initial reply, I began to ask myself what my assumptions were in working with somebody who wanted to deal with life-problems?  Did I think that they were problems that were behavioral or problems that were inherent in "the self."  So you've gotten me thinking about your point of view here in a way that I hadn't thought before.

     My provisional thought, by the way, was that I thought that the problems, to the degree that they were psychological and social, were in fact parts of the self, but the problems came in the limited ways that the self was able to think about itself and other people.  That is,  I actually am the terrible person that I've always thought I was.  My problem is that I've limited my thinking, and that I am also other things in addition to being a terrible person.  I am trapped as long as I believe I am only a terrible person or as long as I believe I've been duped into believing I'm a terrible person, because I cannot convince myself of either proposition.  If I believe that I am only a terrible person, of course, then I am lying to myself as well.  There are lies all over the landscape here, and it's simple to get trapped.

     Once I accept my rotten self as a real and important part of who I am, I can begin to claim other aspects of myself.  I need to be able to see myself as complex.  Certainly the description you offer, which splits  person from actions and behavior, doesn't seem to work well for me.  My experience is that selves are much more complex than simple; and that selves are composed of much more than goodness and purity.

     I would still appreciate an answer, if you feel the answer worth giving to the question I asked you a few days ago.  As usual, I found myself being long winded about it:

quote:


If a guy lies to me or cheats me, that may be his behavior, and I may forgive him for it, but I have also been led to make a decision about the being that's at the wheel in there.  I call myself "experienced" for having done so.  

     Essorant, if you tell me that you're going to plunk down your kid's college money to buy shares in this guy's new scheme to air- condition the whole of the Amazon basin with zero point energy and your dog's old frisbees, I would be somewhat on the surprised side.  I think of you as being "experienced" as well.

     If you tell me that his old actions forbid you from believing in his new plan, I would ask you to distinguish for me how that differs from deciding the guy himself isn't to be trusted.  Is there some way it can be distinguished by a well-meaning outside observer?  Because I haven't come up with a way yet.




     I think you tried to take a swing at it a day or two later, but I think you actually skipped by the question part, which was, "Is there some way it can be distinguished by a well-meaning outside observer?  "  The referent to "it" can be read from the more extended quote I've offered above; there's only so much repetition I want to inflict here.

     Any thoughts on these matters by Essorant or by anybody else?

Sincerely, BobK.
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


47 posted 07-15-2008 06:25 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Because I'm impatient, and I like to ask everybody the same question, I asked my son the same questions---

his answer:

"I am that I am."

(Um, my son is an atheist, too.)

or?

at least he thinks he is

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


48 posted 07-15-2008 10:21 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Serenity,

           Greetings, Friend!  You might try asking your son if he is quoting Popeye, God or is trying to leave things ambiguous?  Inquiring minds want to know!  Best from BobK in LA.
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


49 posted 07-15-2008 10:35 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

I will! *laughing*

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> Can Anyone Other Than A Recluse   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors