Discourse on Human Value Systems

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"). Those kind of questions can be asked in the off-topic section.
User avatar
stoicHoneyBadger
New Trial Member
Posts: 1
Joined: March 26th, 2021, 10:46 am

Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by stoicHoneyBadger »

Hello friends, I wrote down some thoughts of how people use value systems, in case someone would be interested in reading and discussing them... :)

Since the dawn of time, when first protohumans climbed down from trees and started building a civilization, being unable to perceive the whole reality as it is, they started creating cognitive tools that would help them explore, simplify and interpret the surrounding world in a way necessary to at least survive and procreate.

And one of such tools, needed to orient oneself in the world, is a value system.

As David Hume pointed out, "you cannot derive an ought from an is", meaning you cannot come to a value judgement from a scientific observation.

Therefor any claims of "we do not need faith, as we have science!" are absurd. Science is a great tool for exploring the natural world, but it is completely unable to tell you how to use the results of this exploration. It can tell you how to split atoms, yet whether you should split them in a power plant or above an enemy city is a value judgment.

Usually, people are indoctrinated into those values systems by a religion, philosophy or culture in general. Sometimes people are able to construct their own systems. Afterwards confirmation bias kicks in and the adept starts seeing his value system as the one and only true, while competing systems are perceived as delusional.

Such bias clearly has its evolutionary advantages, as people sharing the same value system can act in unison and be victorious over those, who are unable to cooperate due to different value system.

So, while value systems are arbitrary, at times it might be beneficial to act as if they are not.

Usually, such value systems come down to answering the following three questions:

how did the universe come into being?

what is our relationship with the world? / what is our life goal? / how we should treat each other?

what happens after death?

It might be wise to evaluate those systems not from perspective of perceived truth (as none of them can be objectively proven to be true or false), but rather by their effect on the individual and the society in general.

For a value system to become viral, it usually needs to be at least loosely based in what is known as a "hero's journey" – hero feels a call to adventure, finds some supernatural guidance, fights the dragon, usually dies in some way, but then is reborn to guide his disciples to paradise.

It seems that whether this journey contains a supernatural being or not is just a "marketing gimmick". Therefor all those arguments between theists and atheists are futile, as instead of focusing on the values proposed by the given system, they focus whether the hero had his revelation after studying in a library or rather after inhaling a burning bush and supposedly communicating with a supernatural deity.

Author believes it is wise to pick a desired outcome on a dogmatic level (because I said so) and then pragmatically choose a value system that would most likely lead to the given outcome in a particular situation. In other words, pick the ends dogmatically, then choose the means pragmatically.

Any means are good, as long as they work in the current situation and are not counter-productive to the end goal. If one discovers that the given means do not work, he should reevaluate the situation and choose more appropriate means.

Unfortunately, most people do it vice versa – they link their self-worth with using some particular means, convince themselves that those means are the only true and will lead them to the best outcome possible, and then follow them blindly, without an exact end in mind. Even seeing that those means do are not working in the given situation, people often are unable to reconsider and keep pushing until the system crumbles on itself.
User avatar
The Beast
Posts: 1403
Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by The Beast »

Hello.
Symbolism is how we look at the inner psychological self. Who fights the lion? He who does is armed by the God/Gods with the special weapons. Yet, some choose the lion as the symbol of what they represent. It is a very ancient theme. Lions are the gatekeepers. One Biblical example is Ezra when he returned from Babylon to the promised land with the Torah and the symbolic lion of Judah. As for modern countries it is lions guarding democracy and the Republic… for now. Some would rather identify with the Book of Ezra. In the Assyrian mural of the lion eating the bull there is room for the Pride and all others will be driven away and for sure vultures and Hyenas are not welcome. Maybe the little Jackal gets away with the scraps.
Alias
Posts: 3119
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by Alias »

stoicHoneyBadger wrote: March 26th, 2021, 10:49 am Since the dawn of time, when first protohumans climbed down from trees
That wasn't the dawn of time. Time was already 13 billion+/- years into its devolution before any proto-humans could be identified.
and started building a civilization,
They didn't start building civilizations for another 100,000 +/- years. What they had was small roaming bands, living off the land as best they could.
being unable to perceive the whole reality as it is, they started creating cognitive tools that would help them explore, simplify and interpret the surrounding world in a way necessary to at least survive and procreate.
No, they didn't create any cognitive tools. Their brains had been evolving for 3 billion +/- years, growing larger and more segmented, to be sure, but the surviving and procreating simply continued uninterrupted in the branching off from other hominid apes.
And one of such tools, needed to orient oneself in the world, is a value system.
That comes as standard equipment with all sentience. It begins with an amoeba actively seeking the warm end of the puddle and grows increasingly complex with brain size, which grows in response to environmental complexity.
As David Hume pointed out, "you cannot derive an ought from an is", meaning you cannot come to a value judgement from a scientific observation.
Finally, an accurate statement. Values are about preference of condition, not observation of fact.
Therefor any claims of "we do not need faith, as we have science!" are absurd.
Maybe so. Does "faith" have any more to do with values than science does? It seems to me, both are irrelevant to preference, or judgements of better and worse.
Usually, people are indoctrinated into those values systems by a religion,
Faith in the ancestors' judgment.
philosophy
If the parents are diligent in their application of a particular school of thought to their daily life. In my experience, that's far less common than unthinking (if inconsistent) adherence to religious dogma.
or culture in general.
All social animals are subject to the mores of their culture. Some degree of variance may be tolerated, but only minor matters.
Sometimes people are able to construct their own systems.
In the same way that one might build a house from reclaimed building materials with borrowed tools on rented land. It's never an original system; it's a reconfiguration of learned components.
Afterwards confirmation bias kicks in and the adept starts seeing his value system as the one and only true, while competing systems are perceived as delusional.
That usually happens in groups, where the authority, such as a shaman or chieftain, tells the all the other people that they have the only true belief - the one that keeps him in power. Where an individual devises his own value system, he generally begins with the recognition that his fellow citizens are following a wrong path.
Such bias clearly has its evolutionary advantages, as people sharing the same value system can act in unison and be victorious over those, who are unable to cooperate due to different value system.
If that's the case, I fear for the United States!
In fact, no social organization can function at all without some shared values, beliefs and rules of conduct.
So, while value systems are arbitrary,
What makes you think that?? There is a reason, based in some present or past circumstance, for every aspect of every system. None of it happened by chance or randomly.
Usually, such value systems come down to answering the following three questions:
I don't think so.
how did the universe come into being?
While all primitive peoples have their own origin story, they're generally unconcerned with the universe at large. Mythology is about nature, human nature, group identity, the geography in which the people live and the nature and role of other species with which they interact.
what is our relationship with the world? / what is our life goal? / how we should treat each other?
Those are three separate questions regarding ethics, rather than values. The life goal one is far from universal - may even be considered frivolous, but the other two are essential to the making of laws and economies.
what happens after death?
That's not a value question, either. Speculation to stave off the inevitability of our own annihilation. Both this and the origin of the universe question are more about imagination than evaluation.
For a value system to become viral,
Viral? Value systems evolve organically through the experience of a group, but they're not contagious. Ideas may be shared as different groups interact through commerce, social exchange or war; one group may influence or coerce another to accept some or all of its values.
it usually needs to be at least loosely based in what is known as a "hero's journey" – hero feels a call to adventure, finds some supernatural guidance, fights the dragon, usually dies in some way, but then is reborn to guide his disciples to paradise.
That's your basic prophet legend. It's concerned with values only insofar as the prophet/hero/martyr/demigod embodies the highest values of his society and his journey serves to reinforce or re-invigorate those values.
It seems that whether this journey contains a supernatural being or not is just a "marketing gimmick".
It very well can be. A story is only as powerful as the people investing in it. Some gimmicks pay off.
Therefor all those arguments between theists and atheists are futile, as instead of focusing on the values proposed by the given system, they focus whether the hero had his revelation after studying in a library or rather after inhaling a burning bush and supposedly communicating with a supernatural deity.
The legitimacy of its source is one means of evaluating the veracity of a message.
Author believes it is wise to pick a desired outcome on a dogmatic level (because I said so)
Who? What dogma?
pragmatically choose a value system that would most likely lead to the given outcome in a particular situation.
What? "Desired outcome" is pretty much the definition of "value".
Any means are good, as long as they work in the current situation and are not counter-productive to the end goal. If one discovers that the given means do not work, he should reevaluate the situation and choose more appropriate means.
If one had no ethical or legal framework to constrain one's actions. But then, one would have no value system, so what are you talking about?
Unfortunately, most people do it vice versa – they link their self-worth with using some particular means, convince themselves that those means are the only true and will lead them to the best outcome possible, and then follow them blindly, without an exact end in mind. Even seeing that those means do are not working in the given situation, people often are unable to reconsider and keep pushing until the system crumbles on itself.
Examples?
gad-fly
Posts: 1133
Joined: October 23rd, 2019, 4:48 pm

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by gad-fly »

stoicHoneyBadger wrote: March 26th, 2021, 10:49 am
And one of such tools, needed to orient oneself in the world, is a value system.

Usually, such value systems come down to answering the following three questions:

how did the universe come into being?

what is our relationship with the world? / what is our life goal? / how we should treat each other?

what happens after death?

Unfortunately, most people do it vice versa – they link their self-worth with using some particular means, convince themselves that those means are the only true and will lead them to the best outcome possible, and then follow them blindly, without an exact end in mind. Even seeing that those means do are not working in the given situation, people often are unable to reconsider and keep pushing until the system crumbles on itself.
Value system is not a tool. It is a behavior-governing framework.

Value system does not come down to answer questions, like life after death.

Most people are smart enough to link self-worth before using appropriate means as fomented in the value system.

To show you an example, in economics the consumer theory is a value system in which each consumer picks the bundle of goods to maximize his utility, in n-dimensions. In general, a value system serves to optimize or maximize your utility. A value system never crumbles.
User avatar
Count Lucanor
Posts: 2318
Joined: May 6th, 2017, 5:08 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Umberto Eco
Location: Panama
Contact:

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by Count Lucanor »

stoicHoneyBadger wrote: March 26th, 2021, 10:49 am Since the dawn of time, when first protohumans climbed down from trees and started building a civilization, being unable to perceive the whole reality as it is, they started creating cognitive tools that would help them explore, simplify and interpret the surrounding world in a way necessary to at least survive and procreate.

And one of such tools, needed to orient oneself in the world, is a value system.
I'm not sure what is meant by "creating cognitive tools". It could be that our biological evolution included the development of cognitive traits that allows us innate, automatic responses to certain environmental circumstances, but then it's not like we "create" them in the strict sense of the word. And we could say those instincts correspond to values, but not necessarily a value system, which does seems to imply a creation, an a posteriori development of rational thought that expands in culture.
stoicHoneyBadger wrote: March 26th, 2021, 10:49 am As David Hume pointed out, "you cannot derive an ought from an is", meaning you cannot come to a value judgement from a scientific observation.
Therefor any claims of "we do not need faith, as we have science!" are absurd. Science is a great tool for exploring the natural world, but it is completely unable to tell you how to use the results of this exploration. It can tell you how to split atoms, yet whether you should split them in a power plant or above an enemy city is a value judgment.
So what? How is this related to the existence of values or the development of value systems? Anyway, just because science cannot take a normative stance, does not mean the only option left is faith. That's a false dichotomy.
stoicHoneyBadger wrote: March 26th, 2021, 10:49 am Usually, people are indoctrinated into those values systems by a religion, philosophy or culture in general. Sometimes people are able to construct their own systems. Afterwards confirmation bias kicks in and the adept starts seeing his value system as the one and only true, while competing systems are perceived as delusional.
People is not a separate reality from religion, philosophy or culture, all those things are made by people. Then it is people who indoctrinate themselves, creating religions, philosophies and cultures.
stoicHoneyBadger wrote: March 26th, 2021, 10:49 am Such bias clearly has its evolutionary advantages, as people sharing the same value system can act in unison and be victorious over those, who are unable to cooperate due to different value system.
You're conflating here innate, instinctive values, which could play a function in biological mechanisms of survival, and cultural values system, which very unlikely play a role in biological evolution. We come already adapted biologically to our social and cultural environment, and it is in that cultural environment where things like religion, philosophy or science develop and evolve.
stoicHoneyBadger wrote: March 26th, 2021, 10:49 am So, while value systems are arbitrary, at times it might be beneficial to act as if they are not.
Value systems are social conventions, and as such they are arbitrary (that is, relative to a particular society and time), but how they're internalized by the subjects is not that much arbitrary.
stoicHoneyBadger wrote: March 26th, 2021, 10:49 am Usually, such value systems come down to answering the following three questions:

how did the universe come into being?

what is our relationship with the world? /

what happens after death?
I thought we were talking about "oughts". These questions are not related to such values. BTW, science is perfectly capable of trying to answer these questions.
The wise are instructed by reason, average minds by experience, the stupid by necessity and the brute by instinct.
― Marcus Tullius Cicero
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by Nick_A »

S H B, from the OP:
In other words, pick the ends dogmatically, then choose the means pragmatically.

This is how value systems devolve into subjective conceptions which become acceptable to the majority of the population.
But this raises the question if universal objective values exist and if they can be remembered as Plato described through objective conscience. This is very dangerous since the world is content with pragmatic values and doesn't want to rock the boat. The person who experiences objective consciousness and objective conscience can easily be killed for rocking the boat. The prison of Plato's cave is the norm.

The universal experience and acceptance of universal objective values which initiate with what Plato described as the GOOD, is a long way off. Pragmatic concerns will win out

From Plato's Cave allegory:
[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.
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
popeye1945
Posts: 1110
Joined: October 22nd, 2020, 2:22 am
Favorite Philosopher: Alfred North Whitehead
Location: canada

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by popeye1945 »

Value systems of the past, religions/mythologies, in a sense are largely failed science, intended to give a functional orientation to bewilderment about being and being in the world. Out of ignorance, necesssity dictates a creative solution, absurd premises are put forward, and once you've accepted one grand absurdity, the rest fellows readily. It is humanity that created these mythologies/religions, and it is man who has created the scientific method upon which the sciences are based as self-correcting method. There is no self-correcting involved with these past failed attempts labled religion/mythology. The world is relational in nature, so we must ask ourselves, in the effort to create morality, and of course, morality is all about values, what must it then relate to, and the answer is our common biology, and the method is science in the doing/the relating. A differing perspective upon nihilism tells us that the physical world is utterly meaningless in the absence of a conscious subject, so a common biology/consciousness humanity is the source of all meaning, it is our basic function of being in the world when morality/values are based on anything other than the life and welfare of the biology that is to create it, it is somewhat insane.
Alias
Posts: 3119
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by Alias »

Science and mythology do not serve the same function.
While both arise from curiosity and imagination, they fill very different needs.
Science sets out to discover how things work and how to make them work for us; mythology is a narrative of our collective experience; to some extent, a record of each tribe's cultural journey.
Philosophy, particularly as regards ethics, political organization and jurisprudence, serves a third, separate purpose.
Religionists consider themselves the natural heirs to tribal lore, even though artists are more adept and honest in filling that role.
Religionists have, from the earliest urban civilization, consolidated and fortified the mythology into religious dogma, observance, superstition and ritual. They also try diligently to co-opt ethics, politics and jurisprudence, and are often successful.
If you make the mistake of conflating those concepts, the religionists win, take over control and oppress everyone else.
popeye1945
Posts: 1110
Joined: October 22nd, 2020, 2:22 am
Favorite Philosopher: Alfred North Whitehead
Location: canada

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by popeye1945 »

Alias, Science, and mythology/religion have not in the past dealt with the same things, but it is reasonable that science should endevour to do what has been done poorly by these entities. Mythology, as the other man's religion is still functioning on the knowledge of the past, a societal blueprint two and a half thousand years old, in some cases more, is still claiming creadibility in this day and age. The self-correcting element of the scientific method is what gives science the edge in the formations of new knowledge. All to these things have the same source, they arise out of the nature of our common biology, but only one is self-correcting. Perhaps I am in error in saying they have not dealt with the same things in the past, because many absurd statements in religion are of a scientific nature, stating thus that this is the nature of reality, even claiming absolute knowledge for what it is impossible to know. We can only hope to overcome these negative aspects of mythology/religion as religion, with the effort of reason, belief is much more appealing to a population, as it takes less effort and less knowledge and it is much more pleaseing to believe what you wish to believe.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by Nick_A »

Will science disprove the essence of religion or will science prove the necessity for the essence of religion? Perhaps Simone is right and there is a way to reconcile science and religion.
I believe that one identical thought is to be found—expressed very precisely and with only slight differences of modality—in. . .Pythagoras, Plato, and the Greek Stoics. . .in the Upanishads, and the Bhagavad Gita; in the Chinese Taoist writings and. . .Buddhism. . .in the dogmas of the Christian faith and in the writings of the greatest Christian mystics. . .I believe that this thought is the truth, and that it today requires a modern and Western form of expression. That is to say, it should be expressed through the only approximately good thing we can call our own, namely science. This is all the less difficult because it is itself the origin of science. Simone Weil….Simone Pétrement, Simone Weil: A Life, Random House, 1976, p. 488

"To restore to science as a whole, for mathematics as well as psychology and sociology, the sense of its origin and veritable destiny as a bridge leading toward God---not by diminishing, but by increasing precision in demonstration, verification and supposition---that would indeed be a task worth accomplishing." Simone Weil
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
popeye1945
Posts: 1110
Joined: October 22nd, 2020, 2:22 am
Favorite Philosopher: Alfred North Whitehead
Location: canada

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by popeye1945 »

Nick, That life on earth is part of something larger than itself is hopefully common knowledge. There are numerous possible spiritual experiences available to us, in any attempt to feel the rapture of being alive and in the world. Organized religion has nothing to do with spirituality, and reality as we know it, is not always pretty, but where it is not, it is often sublime. There are in these traditions you've listed, much wisdom to be glean, so much more so than the formal desert religion of west
Alias
Posts: 3119
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by Alias »

popeye1945 wrote: March 27th, 2021, 5:15 pm Alias, Science, and mythology/religion have not in the past dealt with the same things, but it is reasonable that science should endevour to do what has been done poorly by these entities.
It cannot. That is not the purpose or function of science, and if science is co-opted to displace religion or social organization, it will not only fail, but in failing, vindicate the religionists who want to take over and give them even more power.
Mythology, as the other man's religion is still functioning on the knowledge of the past,
It does rather more than that. It's not just "other men's religion": mythology can take new forms as new media become available. Mythology is story-telling of the most profound kind: through metaphor, symbolism, graphic imagery and archetypes, it translates the experience of individual humans into an understanding of the tribe and even the species. It creates a language and iconography of a culture, as well as summing up the character of a people in the history which has formed it. This is why the arts are better than religions at narrating a people's spiritual journey.
and a societal blueprint two and a half thousand years old, in some cases more, is still claiming creadibility in this day and age.
No, that's religion. And even religion adapts to new circumstances - in particular, it tends to be very deft at fitting itself to any economic power-structure. Religion is based on a single myth, which thereby becomes static, as if turned to stone. Cultural mythology, on the other hand, is alive, fluid, continues to be written. Think, for example, of American mythology: Davy Crockett, Paul Bunyan and Babe, Jesse James and Wyatt Earp, Honest Abe and Robert E Lee; the Trail of Tears, the Oregon Trail, the Underground Railroad, the Pony Express; the Delaware, The Alamo, Pearl Harbor, the Twin Towers and Whatisname's walk on the big dusty rock.... Eevents, places and personalities are woven into a people's cultural character.
The self-correcting element of the scientific method is what gives science the edge in the formations of new knowledge.
has nothing to do with identity or how a group of people relates the rest of the world.
All to these things have the same source, they arise out of the nature of our common biology, but only one is self-correcting.
One is a self-correcting mechanism, the other is a responsive organism.
The absurdities of religious claim, when it attempts to invade the territory of other disciplines, is quite irrelevant to the purpose and operation of the other disciplines.
popeye1945
Posts: 1110
Joined: October 22nd, 2020, 2:22 am
Favorite Philosopher: Alfred North Whitehead
Location: canada

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by popeye1945 »

You are very fulent, there are many things we disagree about, but the fact that you find so many things to disagree about is telling. I read a previous post of yours of which I was much offended. It may even be in this thread, you disagree with absolutely everything the chap/lady stated, it appearred to be an attempt to destroy the individual, which too, is telling. I have an ego too, but do not attempt to feed it to this extent. If you wish to dialogue with me take a more reasonable approach. You are intelligent, but the steamroller affect is not pleasing.
Alias
Posts: 3119
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by Alias »

popeye1945 wrote: March 27th, 2021, 11:11 pm You are very fulent, there are many things we disagree about, but the fact that you find so many things to disagree about is telling.
Your disagreement is telling you something about me?
I read a previous post of yours of which I was much offended.
I'm sorry you were offended. I was unaware that you had anything at stake.
It may even be in this thread, you disagree with absolutely everything the chap/lady stated,
It may very well have been in this thread, since the OP contains a large number of erroneous statements.
it appearred to be an attempt to destroy the individual,
I had no such intention. I don't know the individual and have no animosity whatsoever toward them. I was addressing the subject matter, not the person.
I have an ego too, but do not attempt to feed it to this extent. If you wish to dialogue with me take a more reasonable approach. You are intelligent, but the steamroller affect is not pleasing.
Then I shall refrain from offending you any further.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Discourse on Human Value Systems

Post by Nick_A »

popeye

Nick, That life on earth is part of something larger than itself is hopefully common knowledge. There are numerous possible spiritual experiences available to us, in any attempt to feel the rapture of being alive and in the world. Organized religion has nothing to do with spirituality, and reality as we know it, is not always pretty, but where it is not, it is often sublime. There are in these traditions you've listed, much wisdom to be glean, so much more so than the formal desert religion of west.

A big problem when discussing religion is that it is a word like art and love for example that has layers of meaning. Are you familiar with the book: "The Transcendent Unity of Religions"?

Frithjof Schuon' describes the basic three levels of religion as the exoteric, esoteric, and transcendent.
As Huston Smith writes in the Introduction to Schuon’s book,
“the defect in other versions of this
[esoteric/exoteric] distinction is that they claim unity in
religions too soon, at levels where, being exoteric, true
Unity does not pertain and can be posited only on pain of
Procrusteanism or vapidity.” Once we identify any
particular thought system, no matter how comprehensive, as
the truth, then we have excluded other thought
systems and denied the Truth its unity and its infinite
possibilities for expression. The unity of Truth must
therefore be a Transcendent Unity. “The fact that it
is transcendent,” Smith writes, “means that it
can be univocally described by none.” Thus, while
there is one and only one Truth, there are many expressions
of it.
The exoteric level is filled with partial truths people believe and argue over. Some enter the esoteric level which is the inner search to experience truth rather than just blind belief. Even less enter the transcendent level of religious understanding in which the great traditions of the past initiating with a conscious source become one on the way to truth. The term religion then has several levels of meaning.
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
Post Reply

Return to “General Philosophy”

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