Morality and Intelligence

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
Post Reply
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Rr6 »

Cosmic Evoluting Transformations
By R6

From the synergetic concentric hierarchy,
To the action of the toroidal process,
So begins our fall,
From equilibrous grace,
And the God-ess-ence,
Of total comprehension,
Into the quasi-reality,
Of disequilibrious,
Oscillating states of consciousness.

We evolute outward from an involution,
With seven planes and seven faces,
Sometimes diverging and then converging,
In eternal transformation,
From the unknown to the known,
In orbiting trajectories,
That are forever approaching,
The critical proximities,
Of absolute truth.

Intellect beyond time,
Purpose preceding space,
Falling in and out of love,
The interrelationships of God-ess-ence,
Encompasses all experience,
As limited, finite, quantum bits,
And their associated voids of space,
Tuned-out, as ultra micro-fields of gravity.
Rr6 wrote:
r6--Access to more intelligence means a longer list of morals, not necessarily more moral person.
Experience precedes thought.
Experience invokes feelings that are emoted to various degrees as emotions depending on the individuals ability or desire to moderate them.
Experience includes seeing, or hearing, a communication pattern and then our moderating of the source of this communication pattern.
Always consider the source--- and tone if an auditory communication ----then moderate our responsive feelings, and resultant, emoting emotions, accordingly.
Moderation of our responses is learned pattern also. The more we respond with a specific emotion, the more that patterned emotion is enhanced in our over all set of patterns of emotion. The more we practice this or that emotion the more it becomes automatic.
Rr6 wrote:Morality is a resultant metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts.
"U"niverse = "G"od
...see most wholistic cosmic set of a primary three-ness.....
Universe = God
...see most common views of our finite, occupied space Universe.....
Uni-V-erse = G-o-d
....see Space ( ) - Time ^v - Space )(....
...another cosmic three-ness...............
123, ABC thats how easy morality and intelligence can be..sung to M. Jackson and Jackson 5 tune

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Belindi »

Nick_A wrote:
Yes, the majority are content to be atoms of the Great Beast living in Plato’s cave with “wretched contentment.” Jesus wasn’t a philosopher nor was Buddha. They were men. As atoms of the great beast we don’t know what that means.
I'd bet that is true of all of us from time to time. Even fanatics have to go to sleep. Educationists try to enable the "atoms of the Great Beast" to transcend waking hours sloth. On a practical note, Nick, can gnostics be democrats?
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Fooloso4 »

Nick_A:
True but this is assuming a complete lack of consciousness capable of learning by conscious experience. In the movie Groundhog Day for example, our hero who was a complete obnoxious egoist learned through experience of the day over and over that his ego prevented him from a human experience.
Do you remember living this life before? Do you remember having this conversation before? Eternal recurrence as described by Nietzsche means that if we are to live this day over and over again we will live it the same each time. There would be no learning from experience each time the day is lived. If there was it would not be eternal recurrence of the same. Thus Spoke Zarathustra is not Groundhog Day.
I keep saying it and you keep missing the point. There is nothing transcendent about conscious attention.
You are not being forthcoming here. You tie conscious attention to an ascent from the cave, a notion of objectivity not possible in the cave, conscious evolution, and attendance to God.
Nietzsche is writing of secular transcendence as an expression of will and riding the wheel of samsara forever.
He is not writing of secular transcendence. Self-overcoming and transcendence are two very different things. Eternal recurrence and samara are not the same either. It is ludicrous that you think you are able to understand Nietzsche by reference to such things as a movie and a concept foreign to him instead of attending to what he actually said.
Conscious evolution of human being requires conscious attention and help from above in the form of grace.


In the same paragraph that begins with the denial that there is anything transcendent about conscious attention you end with the connection between conscious attention and “help from above”.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Nick_A »

F4
Do you remember living this life before? Do you remember having this conversation before? Eternal recurrence as described by Nietzsche means that if we are to live this day over and over again we will live it the same each time. There would be no learning from experience each time the day is lived. If there was it would not be eternal recurrence of the same. Thus Spoke Zarathustra is not Groundhog Day.
We cannot remember because we are not conscious of experience. The universe is governed by the results of both mechanical laws and consciousness. The lack of consciousness limits results to mechanical laws and mechanical eternal recurrence.

Why limit the concept to Nietzsche? Suppose for example the eternity of our life is like a flat circle. This means that yesterday and tomorrow are still taking place on the flat circle and the circle repeats. We can’t prove these things since they take place if they do on the fourth fifth and sixth dimensions which being limited to three dimensions we cannot experience accept at these times when something in our psyche opens to human potential as it did with Buddha for example.
You are not being forthcoming here. You tie conscious attention to an ascent from the cave, a notion of objectivity not possible in the cave, conscious evolution, and attendance to God.
Ascent from the cave first requires the conscious recognition that we are in the cave. This comes by conscious attention. If we live in imagination which by definition takes place in the absence of conscious attention, we remain in the cave.
He is not writing of secular transcendence. Self-overcoming and transcendence are two very different things. Eternal recurrence and samara are not the same either. It is ludicrous that you think you are able to understand Nietzsche by reference to such things as a movie and a concept foreign to him instead of attending to what he actually said.
I know what Nietzsche wrote. I’m tying to understand eternal recurrence.

http://www.theperspectivesofnietzsche.c ... recur.html

Nietzsche describes the overman as the meaning of the earth: the ultimate Man. I believe the ultimate Man is conscious man which has a cosmic purpose. My understanding allows me to appreciate the potential for universal purpose as well as human meaning and purpose within it along with the logical integration of science and the essence of religion. It allows me to experience logical sense where others only see nonsense. It works for me.
In the same paragraph that begins with the denial that there is anything transcendent about conscious attention you end with the connection between conscious attention and “help from above”.
Conscious attention creates empty spaces normally filled with imagination. if anyone becomes open to the following it will open new doors.
"Grace fills empty spaces, but it can only enter where there is a void to receive it We must continually suspend the work of the imagination in filling the void within ourselves."
"In no matter what circumstances, if the imagination is stopped from pouring itself out, we have a void (the poor in spirit). In no matter what circumstances... imagination can fill the void. This is why the average human beings can become prisoners, slaves, prostitutes, and pass thru no matter what suffering without being purified."

"That is why we fly from the inner void, since God might steal into it. It is not the pursuit of pleasure and the aversion for effort which causes sin, but fear of God. We know that we cannot see him face to face without dying, and we do not want to die."
Simone Weil -- Gravity and Grace

-- Updated Wed Mar 22, 2017 8:05 pm to add the following --

Belindi asks me
On a practical note, Nick, can gnostics be democrats?
This is like asking me if a Christian can be a democrat. People will argue about what a gnostic and a Christian actually are and what a democrat is. A gnostic is dedicated to knowledge that is of no use to democrats so if a gnostic becomes a democrat it is strictly for political purposes having nothing to do with gnosticism.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Belindi »

Nick_A wrote:
Belindi asks me
On a practical note, Nick, can gnostics be democrats?


This is like asking me if a Christian can be a democrat. People will argue about what a gnostic and a Christian actually are and what a democrat is. A gnostic is dedicated to knowledge that is of no use to democrats so if a gnostic becomes a democrat it is strictly for political purposes having nothing to do with gnosticism.
But gnostics believe that some individuals have special access to the divine. People who have special access to the divine are in a position of political power.

-- Updated March 22nd, 2017, 9:42 pm to add the following --

How could someone with special access to God keep this special knowledge out of his political life? Would God not be telling him what was right and what was wrong?Simone herself was immersed in politics to the danger of her own life.
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Rr6 »

There is no special access to God/Universe, there is however, a feeling of connected-ness to the whole Universe, that, can occur in some special-case circumstances. This is most likely were ideas of oneness stem from.

The feeling of connected-ness and to all existence, and peace/contentment of mind.

out > past > ( * / * ) > future > In > ( * / * )> out > past

To see, as one, to feel, as one and to be/exist as one, amongest the whole-ness of existence.

I exist as part of a greater whole even as the "I"-verse exist in differentiation to the whole

r6
Rr6 wrote:Cosmic Evoluting Transformations
By R6
From the synergetic concentric hierarchy,
To the action of the toroidal process,
So begins our fall,
From equilibrous grace,
And the God-ess-ence,
Of total comprehension,
Into the quasi-reality,
Of disequilibrious,
Oscillating states of consciousness.

We evolute outward from an involution,
With seven planes and seven faces,
Sometimes diverging and then converging,
In eternal transformation,
From the unknown to the known,
In orbiting trajectories,
That are forever approaching,
The critical proximities,
Of absolute truth.

Intellect beyond time,
Purpose preceding space,
Falling in and out of love,
The interrelationships of God-ess-ence,
Encompasses all experience,
As limited, finite, quantum bits,
And their associated voids of space,
Tuned-out, as ultra micro-fields of gravity.
Rr6 wrote: (Nested quote removed.)

Experience precedes thought.
Experience invokes feelings that are emoted to various degrees as emotions depending on the individuals ability or desire to moderate them.
Experience includes seeing, or hearing, a communication pattern and then our moderating of the source of this communication pattern.
Always consider the source--- and tone if an auditory communication ----then moderate our responsive feelings, and resultant, emoting emotions, accordingly.
Moderation of our responses is learned pattern also. The more we respond with a specific emotion, the more that patterned emotion is enhanced in our over all set of patterns of emotion. The more we practice this or that emotion the more it becomes automatic.

(Nested quote removed.)
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Fooloso4 »

Nick_A:
We cannot remember because we are not conscious of experience.
Well, we are not conscious of that experience. That must be either because it is not something we have experienced or it is an experience we are not conscious of. Either way we cannot say that there is an eternal recurrence that one might be capable of being conscious of. It is just something you imagine.
Why limit the concept to Nietzsche?
If we are talking about Nietzsche’s concept then it is the discussion of Nietzsche’s concept that limits us to Nietzsche’s concept. If you want to talk about some other concept then you should make it clear that you are not talking about Nietzsche, but you have been talking about it as if it were Nietzsche’s concept that you are addressing.
We can’t prove these things since they take place if they do on the fourth fifth and sixth dimensions which being limited to three dimensions we cannot experience accept at these times when something in our psyche opens to human potential as it did with Buddha for example.
What do you know of the fourth fifth and sixth dimensions? If it is something that Buddha experienced but you have not then you do not know what you are talking about. You are simply imagining something you have not experienced and have no knowledge of.
Ascent from the cave first requires the conscious recognition that we are in the cave. This comes by conscious attention. If we live in imagination which by definition takes place in the absence of conscious attention, we remain in the cave.
And so you have said over and over again. Repeating it yet again does not diminish the fact that you are, to put it politely, being disingenuous when you deny the connection between conscious attention and transcendence. The idea that you are in a cave comes from someone telling you about Plato's cave, not from "conscious recognition". The only was to know that there is some other reality is to have direct firsthand experience of it. All else is just imagination.
I know what Nietzsche wrote. I’m tying to understand eternal recurrence.

Why limit the concept to Nietzsche?
So, which is it? Are you trying to understand what Nietzsche means by eternal recurrence as the link would indicate or understand whatever anyone might mean by it or do you imagine that they are the same because they all refer to something real? If you are trying to understand Nietzsche then linking to some quotes found on an internet site is not going to cut it. You are doing the same thing you do with Plato, and as with Plato I could recommend secondary materials with which to begin a serious study but you seem more interested in just dismissing it all as demonic.
Nietzsche describes the overman as the meaning of the earth: the ultimate Man.
The overman is not the ultimate Man. The idea of the ultimate is one of the primary things he is rejecting.
Conscious attention creates empty spaces normally filled with imagination. if anyone becomes open to the following it will open new doors.
This is just part of your own imaginative scenario, as is your imagined ascent from the cave and your imagined idea of what it was like for Buddha to experience what you have not.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Belindi »

Fooloso4 wrote:
The overman is not the ultimate Man. The idea of the ultimate is one of the primary things he is rejecting.
In that case, I think that Nietzsche is opposed to Hegel . Hegel's dialectic founded upon thesis, antithesis, and synthesis implied and end to history. This was interpreted by Francis Fukuyama in his book The End of History and the Last Man (1989)as a right-wing political end to which history was leading.

Christianity as a credal religion tends towards right-wing politics if the Christian leaders and interpreters are enthusiasts for echatology and premilennialism. These are Conservative because they are fatalistic. The only safety offered in the last days is for the Christian to have been obedient to the teachings according to theose leaders and interpreters.

I see Nietzsche as proponent of , not a death cult as above, but for a man working and praying towards taking responsibility for his own life . I understand that modern theologians support a Christian belief which supports movement towards responsible and reasonable faith, as did Nietzsche, and as do supermen.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Nick_A »

Fooloso4 wrote:Nick_A:
We cannot remember because we are not conscious of experience.
Well, we are not conscious of that experience. That must be either because it is not something we have experienced or it is an experience we are not conscious of. Either way we cannot say that there is an eternal recurrence that one might be capable of being conscious of. It is just something you imagine.
Why limit the concept to Nietzsche?
If we are talking about Nietzsche’s concept then it is the discussion of Nietzsche’s concept that limits us to Nietzsche’s concept. If you want to talk about some other concept then you should make it clear that you are not talking about Nietzsche, but you have been talking about it as if it were Nietzsche’s concept that you are addressing.
We can’t prove these things since they take place if they do on the fourth fifth and sixth dimensions which being limited to three dimensions we cannot experience accept at these times when something in our psyche opens to human potential as it did with Buddha for example.
What do you know of the fourth fifth and sixth dimensions? If it is something that Buddha experienced but you have not then you do not know what you are talking about. You are simply imagining something you have not experienced and have no knowledge of.
Ascent from the cave first requires the conscious recognition that we are in the cave. This comes by conscious attention. If we live in imagination which by definition takes place in the absence of conscious attention, we remain in the cave.
And so you have said over and over again. Repeating it yet again does not diminish the fact that you are, to put it politely, being disingenuous when you deny the connection between conscious attention and transcendence. The idea that you are in a cave comes from someone telling you about Plato's cave, not from "conscious recognition". The only was to know that there is some other reality is to have direct firsthand experience of it. All else is just imagination.
I know what Nietzsche wrote. I’m tying to understand eternal recurrence.

Why limit the concept to Nietzsche?
So, which is it? Are you trying to understand what Nietzsche means by eternal recurrence as the link would indicate or understand whatever anyone might mean by it or do you imagine that they are the same because they all refer to something real? If you are trying to understand Nietzsche then linking to some quotes found on an internet site is not going to cut it. You are doing the same thing you do with Plato, and as with Plato I could recommend secondary materials with which to begin a serious study but you seem more interested in just dismissing it all as demonic.
Nietzsche describes the overman as the meaning of the earth: the ultimate Man.
The overman is not the ultimate Man. The idea of the ultimate is one of the primary things he is rejecting.
Conscious attention creates empty spaces normally filled with imagination. if anyone becomes open to the following it will open new doors.
This is just part of your own imaginative scenario, as is your imagined ascent from the cave and your imagined idea of what it was like for Buddha to experience what you have not.
This is just common sense. You are unfamiliar with conscious attention and have never tried to experience it. You have not experienced how quickly we lose it much less why. We can prove we have the potential for it yet see we cannot sustain it. This can be experienced. Of course I am subject to imagination but this doesn't mean the hypothesis is faulty. You deny there is any level of reality your senses cannot experience. I believe there is and have had personal experiences to verify it. We are at a standoff.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Fooloso4 »

Belindi:
The overman is not the ultimate Man. The idea of the ultimate is one of the primary things he is rejecting.

In that case, I think that Nietzsche is opposed to Hegel. This was interpreted by Francis Fukuyama in his book The End of History and the Last Man(1989)as a right-wing political end to which history was leading.
Yes. Nietzsche takes the idea of the importance of history from Hegel, but unlike Hegel he did not think that history had reached its end or completion. He takes Hegel’s concept of Aufhebung, sublation and, well, sublated it. There is with Nietzsche, as with Hegel, the double sense of going under and rising above, but for Nietzsche there is no dialectic - no positive preservation that results from the negation of a negation. Nietzsche says that creation requires destruction, but what is created is not created out of what is destroyed. And yet, the creator does not stand outside historical development, he could not be as he is without what came before, without, like the phoenix, what he rises out of.
I understand that modern theologians support a Christian belief which supports movement towards responsible and reasonable faith, as did Nietzsche, and as do supermen.
I agree. As I said in another thread the theologian follows the philosopher.

-- Updated March 23rd, 2017, 10:58 am to add the following --

Nick_A:
This is just common sense. You are unfamiliar with conscious attention and have never tried to experience it.
No, it is not common sense. Common sense tells us that if we can pay attention then we have experienced conscious attention. But you mean something quite different. You mean that we should be attentive to the possibility of the presence of God. That is not common sense.
You deny there is any level of reality your senses cannot experience.
Quite the opposite. As I have said many times, reality is not determined by what we can experience or think or imagine. This cuts both ways. Your ability to imagine “levels of reality” has no relation to reality.
I believe there is and have had personal experiences to verify it.
Here the early history of Christianity is instructive. Paul has his “visions” on which he founded a religion. The early Church Fathers accepted these visions as true inspiration, that is, the indwelling of Spirit. But at the same time they rejected the experience of others who claimed to be inspired, calling them heretical or, as you might say, demonic. The problem is, there is no touchstone, no measure by which we can say which if any of these experiences is a verity, or whether any of them verifies anything other than an experience or some unknown etiology.
We are at a standoff.
No, we are not. My inability to persuade you does not mean that your claims stand on equal footing with those of shared experience. We can all see if the sun is shining, but if you claim that you believe that there is some puppet master or god who pulls the strings that moves the sun across the sky and that you have the experience to verify this we are not at a standoff if I deny it. Nor are we at a standoff is you claim to be Napoleon, no matter how much you assure us of your experience of being Napoleon.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Nick_A »

F4
No, we are not. My inability to persuade you does not mean that your claims stand on equal footing with those of shared experience. We can all see if the sun is shining, but if you claim that you believe that there is some puppet master or god who pulls the strings that moves the sun across the sky and that you have the experience to verify this we are not at a standoff if I deny it. Nor are we at a standoff is you claim to be Napoleon, no matter how much you assure us of your experience of being Napoleon.
Apparently you are one who follows the dictates of the Great Beast. You are only open to what a bunch of experts decided is the truth of the matter. If a bunch of experts decide that the Jews are the cause of all evil, then kill the Jews. The legitimate search for truth is not pursued by believing a bunch of experts but by self knowledge – self verification.

From Plato’s Cave:
[Socrates] And if there were a contest, and he had to compete in measuring the shadows with the prisoners who had never moved out of the cave, while his sight was still weak, and before his eyes had become steady (and the time which would be needed to acquire this new habit of sight might be very considerable) would he not be ridiculous? Men would say of him that up he went and down he came without his eyes; and that it was better not even to think of ascending; and if any one tried to loose another and lead him up to the light, let them only catch the offender, and they would put him to death.
You would be one of the experts wanting to catch the offender and put him to death or worse yet have him tormented by twelve secular psychologists. You simply have no idea of the value of opening the human psyche to conscious reality or even what self knowledge is and how to acquire it. You would prefer to condemn those who have had human experiences, the secular experts who only believe what other secular experts have said, remain closed to
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Fooloso4 »

Nick_A:
Apparently you are one who follows the dictates of the Great Beast.
All evidence points to the fact the the Great Beast is your preoccupation and a talisman to protect you from reasoned argument.
You are only open to what a bunch of experts decided is the truth of the matter. If a bunch of experts decide that the Jews are the cause of all evil, then kill the Jews.
This seems both unhinged, desperate, and contrary to your own actions with constant reference to Weil. You are the one bringing in experts as you always do to cloud the issue. Keep in mind that we have been discussing Nietzsche so it is entirely appropriate to refer to him, but Weil is never far from anything you say.
The legitimate search for truth is not pursued by believing a bunch of experts but by self knowledge – self verification.
And this is why Socratic philosophy is not a solitary practice. It is all too easy to convince oneself that you have verified your own assumptions if there is no one to critically oppose you.
You would be one of the experts wanting to catch the offender and put him to death or worse yet have him tormented by twelve secular psychologists.
Do you fancy yourself the philosopher who has returned to the cave? Or do you imagine that your expert is the philosopher? Both fantasies ignore what Plato says about this image of the philosopher and the ascent from the cave. You take all too literally the image that Plato clearly indicates to the careful reader is just an image that should not be taken literally or even seriously. I have provided specific passages from the Republic to show how and where he does this, but you prefer to close your eyes and worship images he cast on the cave wall.
You simply have no idea of the value of opening the human psyche to conscious reality or even what self knowledge is and how to acquire it.
It is, rather, that I do not buy into your beliefs in a transcendent conscious reality. And here I believe I am closer to Plato than you since I take self knowledge to be about my own ignorance whereas you to take it to be about some mythology of transcendence.
You would prefer to condemn those who have had human experiences, the secular experts who only believe what other secular experts have said, remain closed to.
Those who know you from what you say here and on other internet sites know better than to let you get away with playing the victim. You never tire of railing against liberalism/progressivism/secularism. It is not that you hold the beliefs you do that is the problem. It is that you think yourself qualified (an expert) to dictate what others should learn in public schools and what the purpose of public institutions should be. Your screeds about great beasts is nothing more than an attempt to instate a theocracy in accord with your brand of Christianity.

Now I am well aware of your self-professed need to always have the last word, but we have been through all this before. Once again you have managed to turn the conversation away from the question at hand to your own self verified circle of closed beliefs. I am not going to continue in this direction.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Belindi »

Nick_A wrote:
Apparently you are one who follows the dictates of the Great Beast. You are only open to what a bunch of experts decided is the truth of the matter. If a bunch of experts decide that the Jews are the cause of all evil, then kill the Jews. The legitimate search for truth is not pursued by believing a bunch of experts but by self knowledge – self verification.
You say "self knowedge". Do you refer to knowledge about your self; or do you mean knowledge that you yourself have somehow achieved?
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Nick_A »

F4
Apparently you are one who follows the dictates of the Great Beast.
No. I have become aware of its nature and how it is a creature of reaction reacting to earthly and cosmic influences. As such, the appeal to reason is meaningless. Having become aware of the sociological human condition I became more aware of the value and necessity for these unique individuals like Simone Weil capable of serving as awakening influences to what we are not by their words but by their presence and actions in opposition to human collective gullibility.
This seems both unhinged, desperate, and contrary to your own actions with constant reference to Weil. You are the one bringing in experts as you always do to cloud the issue. Keep in mind that we have been discussing Nietzsche so it is entirely appropriate to refer to him, but Weil is never far from anything you say.
Simone Weil is not an expert. She didn’t parrot others. She was not part of a collective. She was simply Simone Weil: a seeker of truth.

We have been discussing morality as it relates to intelligence. I have insisted that man made morality is dangerous and cannot be considered an aspect of anything other than the Beast’s definition of intelligence. Objective Conscience, anamnesis, reflects human intelligence. Morality is an expression of indoctrination which easily brings mixed results.. Nietzsche seems to believe that man made morality as an expression of human reason is our future. It will lead to our destruction.
And this is why Socratic philosophy is not a solitary practice. It is all too easy to convince oneself that you have verified your own assumptions if there is no one to critically oppose you.
The Socratic dialogue is a good method to raise questions which lead us to experience our errors. But pondering and sincere self examination are personal struggles. You have this need to believe experts and I believe in the value of experiential self verification.
Do you fancy yourself the philosopher who has returned to the cave? Or do you imagine that your expert is the philosopher? Both fantasies ignore what Plato says about this image of the philosopher and the ascent from the cave. You take all too literally the image that Plato clearly indicates to the careful reader is just an image that should not be taken literally or even seriously. I have provided specific passages from the Republic to show how and where he does this, but you prefer to close your eyes and worship images he cast on the cave wall.
Nonsense!. Plato’s allegory is a description of the human condition. Don’t believe it; verify it. Some have the need and courage to verify it in the cause of truth and others prefer to blindly argue and deny. I support those with the need and courage to verify the human condition as it exists within them.
It is, rather, that I do not buy into your beliefs in a transcendent conscious reality. And here I believe I am closer to Plato than you since I take self knowledge to be about my own ignorance whereas you to take it to be about some mythology of transcendence.
Here we agree as to your ignorance. Socrates said “I know nothing.” F4 says “I am ignorant.” Can’t argue that one.

Those who know you from what you say here and on other internet sites know better than to let you get away with playing the victim. You never tire of railing against liberalism/progressivism/secularism. It is not that you hold the beliefs you do that is the problem. It is that you think yourself qualified (an expert) to dictate what others should learn in public schools and what the purpose of public institutions should be. Your screeds about great beasts is nothing more than an attempt to instate a theocracy in accord with your brand of Christianity.
I am not a victim. I left Philosophy Now because it is controlled by a secular atheistic clique intent on the nasty cooperative destruction of anything suggesting the reality of the triune universe. Nothing good can come from such a dominant collective attitude so I left. I’m not a victim. It is just senseless to contribute under those circumstances.

You further the spirit killing taking place within institutions of psychological child abuse called schools. I prefer to defend the alternatives offering education as opposed to indoctrination.
Now I am well aware of your self-professed need to always have the last word, but we have been through all this before. Once again you have managed to turn the conversation away from the question at hand to your own self verified circle of closed beliefs. I am not going to continue in this direction.
Turning in circles is the only direction you are open to. The sad thing is that you have no conception why. However, I will consent to let a cute blonde have the last word and suffer the consequences. :)
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Morality and Intelligence

Post by Belindi »

Nick-A wrote:
I left Philosophy Now because it is controlled by a secular atheistic clique intent on the nasty cooperative destruction of anything suggesting the reality of the triune universe. Nothing good can come from such a dominant collective attitude so I left. I’m not a victim. It is just senseless to contribute under those circumstances.

You further the spirit killing taking place within institutions of psychological child abuse called schools. I prefer to defend the alternatives offering education as opposed to indoctrination.
Within the triune universe, what is the ascribed status of human critical reasoning?
Post Reply

Return to “Ethics and Morality”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

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

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021