This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 5
- Joined: March 3rd, 2018, 1:58 am
This question can be asserted in Morality, but is that truly something we must discuss? Essentially, having a perception 'Beyond Good and Evil" is having a perception which transcends the notion of duality - although duality itself, is still necessary.
Clearly, it's 1-2-3 and not 1-3.
- Big Boss
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 16
- Joined: November 13th, 2016, 2:48 am
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 2901
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
The whole business of "dualism" is merely one thread of our need to play thing off against thing, and by doing so fulfill, in part, our exporative instinct (which could well be said to be "instinct" itself.)
- Posts: 1737
- Joined: June 17th, 2014, 3:11 am
- Favorite Philosopher: P.D. Ouspensky
- Location: Orlando, FL
'Dualistic thinking' is simplistic thinking, and normally leaves out many salient variables and considerations concerning the matter under investigation.
For example, we like to think that something must be either true of false, up or down, left or right, real or imaginary, inside or outside, strong or weak, essential or non-essential, etc, etc, but in reality things can be said to be both or neither, and only appear to be one or the other based on the limitedness of our perception/cognition in relation to the matter in question.
Take 'left' and 'right'. Obviously something can be either on the left or on the right depending on your perspective. This is easy to see. Also, 'inside' or 'outside'. Obviously something can be said to be 'inside' or 'outside' of something else, depending on the POV of the perceiver.
What's not so easy to see is that something can 'exist' or 'not exist', be 'real' or 'imaginary', or be 'true' or 'false', depending on perspective. But it is so...
- Posts: 2363
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
I am reminded of the million monkeys with a million type writers writing Shakespeare. It is seen as possible that with enough monkeys and enough time there would be a chance. I think it would take far more than a million though. Far far more. And obviously no monkey would ever realise that they had regardless of number.