Can you make a Socrates bust out of balloons?
Seriously, I appreciated everything you had to say in this thread as well, especially cutting Nietzsche and Wittgenstein into bite-sized morsels for us.
Can you make a Socrates bust out of balloons?
Perhaps most areas of study are both art and science. Having studied finance, I see it there. It is easy to rush off into the world of business, confident in your ability to construct spreadsheets and give concrete 'true' answers about how to proceed in the quest to maximize equity. But, these 'true' answers turn out to be theoretical after all, as they contain numerous (often incorrect) assumptions about the motivations of all the actors in the drama, first and foremost that money is also the answer to all of their equations. The spreadsheet method further assumes that if all these others will fall in line with your equations, that you will ultimately be satisfied with the money you earn or whatever your money could buy.
I fear you might be missing a lot with this stance, but it depends on how you mean it. Are you only after objective truth? If so, what about subjective truth? One could argue that objective truth is only baby steps. It nice to have an anchor you can trust and say 'this I know is true', but what of defining the person you wish to be, as only you can? All the artsy philosophy is there for you if you want to try, and it seems dangerous to ignore it:
Is he 'right'? Who knows, and really, who cares, if you agree that such statements are important and worthy of contemplating? If you could find value, motivation, or inspiration in such a statement, would you take it, or be forced to dismiss it for not being 'provable'?The biggest danger, that of losing oneself, can pass off in the world as quietly as if it were nothing; every other loss: an arm, a leg, five dollars, a wife, etc. is bound to be noticed. (Kierkegaard)
...unawareness is so far from removing despair that, on the contrary, it may be the most dangerous form of despair. By unconsciousness the despairing man is in a way secured (but to his own destruction) against becoming aware--that is, he is securely in the power of despair.
All truths are good. Personally I don't see the problem with logic V emotion. Logic which ignores emotion is illogical (in my opinion). For example Kinsey (as depicted in the film - in real life I have no idea) argues that logically there should be no issue with him or his wife having other sexual partners. But this rather ignores the fact that Kinsey (and his wife) are human.Are you only after objective truth? If so, what about subjective truth?
Of course! And period appropriate attire with frequent costume changes for each philosopher under discussion.Can you make a Socrates bust out of balloons?
Oh dear, I was thinking it would take just one prick to come along...
I’ve been called worse.Oh dear, I was thinking it would take just one prick to come along…
Me as Mary:Now,I'm wondering what you would look like as Mary Wollstonecraft...
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023