Originally posted by surferarmo How contradictory. Finding proof to disprove a point made in class is a form of question asking, and answer finding.
Anything strewn from the mouth of a philosopher is credible to you. The hallmark of a gullible person. You probably lacked someone to converse deep questions. You chose philosophy to feel better about yourself, so you can find answers to fill the the empty void. You criticise so much, yet you never offer a solution. You criticise to feel better about yourself.
Your lack of resolve has lead to your willingness to criticise others because you lack self-esteem. This is your weakness.
Anything strewn from the mouth of a philosopher is credible to you. The hallmark of a gullible person. You probably lacked someone to converse deep questions. You chose philosophy to feel better about yourself, so you can find answers to fill the the empty void. You criticise so much, yet you never offer a solution. You criticise to feel better about yourself.
Your lack of resolve has lead to your willingness to criticise others because you lack self-esteem. This is your weakness.
The hours you've spent being fed Statist Republican nonsense and now to have your 'beliefs' popped like bubbles by some lame internet mouse who is obsessed with "philosophy" and having a lack of self-esteem must really not be something that is digested too well.
"Anything strewn from the mouth of a philosopher is credible to you. "
Really? And what do you base this assumption on? You are moving upon evidence are you not? Or is this simply something stated because you feel you are left with nothing to rebut in our discussion regarding Iraq since, well, you didn't do youre history homework before participating in this discussion.
Strange that you put me out as someone who "doesn't question" what I absorb, yet all my time here and my discussions with you have been precisely that, to try to get you to question the knowledge you reside by. Now where did you find evidence that I am 'choosing philosophy' whatever that means. Actually I would think that I am 'choosing history', but that is beside the point, I am just critically thinking, something that philosophy is an interesting for, one that I love to delve into and of course it enhances youre logic.
Nevermind what one 'chooses' the point here is to question what we traditionally hold as immutable 'beliefs' in the ideological prisons known as minds. You don't seem to comfortable with it, since I admit it is a big step to try to question what makes you, you. Our minds are precious tools and pivotal to our sense of 'being' and who we are. The ideologies and beliefs we hold are central to who we are since that is how we perceive the real world, and the problems and the solutions to it. In that sense we are all subjective, we all perceive the world through the ideological prisons of our minds and we see the problems and we all know a solution to it, yet to bring yourself to question your version of the world, is of course a big step, it's the equivalent of being unplugged from the Matrix.
It is no wonder that Socrates was killed since he exposed the fallacy of the unthinking masses. It is no wonder that Plato and Aristotle have gone so far as to state that in order to find the 'truth' one must first repeal all the beliefs and opinions and knowledge one holds dear, and to constantly question everything, until you die.
Of course one can see how you may not know this, nor any other statist, since Statists, nor the blind gullible lemmings that follow Statists and their political systems, because it is not in their nature to look at the world from a historical, philosophical, or cultural point of view, but only from a political one. The only thing that concerns statists is their next election and their politics and their opinion polls of what the majority of the herd believes.
I may lack self-esteem, but I am all to ready to admit my flaws, my lack of confidence, my lack of self-esteem, and other frailties, but that is what makes me human, the ability to spot these flaws within me, since I can't be perfect like you surfer, oh you indestructable Republicanator. You on the other hand, believe that you are immune from being brainwashed and that you alone possess the answers to everything ( that's something you and patlajoke have accused me of, although I can't say I have the answers to everything, but rather the questions to everything ). I never claimed to posses 'truth' or 'wisdom' or 'solutions'. I merely uncloack the veil we live in. Now the fact that your statement is soaking in arrogance and over-confidence, doesn't deter you from going further and stating that it is I who lack something, but not you.
Yea I used to believe the world was a morally unambiguous conflict of good and evil, much like the early Christian sect of Manicheism (sp?). After studying history and the works of many great thinkers, be they historian or philosopher, I have come to see the world as much more of a complex place, one far more complex than the world we were taught in our school 'history' or 'civics' class. To be able to expose youre 'beliefs' to the rules of logic and scrutiny, is to go a step beyond the mere lemming, beyond the mere unthinking 'voter', beyond having 'political efficacy', beyond being versed wel on the happenings of current events.
What do you have to say about my response to you regarding the Iraq discussion?
Comment