Courage vs Desperation

Use this forum to discuss the August 2022 Philosophy Book of the Month, Living in Color: A Love Story, In Sickness and in Health by Mike Murphy
User avatar
Sushan
Book of the Month Discussion Leader
Posts: 1143
Joined: February 19th, 2021, 8:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Courage vs Desperation

Post by Sushan »

stevie wrote: August 20th, 2022, 1:08 am
Sushan wrote: August 19th, 2022, 12:24 pm
stevie wrote: August 18th, 2022, 1:10 am
Sushan wrote: August 17th, 2022, 10:08 pm

What do you really mean by the term 'self-delusion'? Is it related to 'self-reverence' or the narcissistic character of the winner? Or in case of the looser, the opposite?
The theoretical thought fabrications about winning or losing and courage are merely driven by self-delusion. If you just do this or that depending on contextual appearances there is no need to theorize about winning or losing and courage beforehand.
Thinking (or theorizing) about winning, loosing, and courage beforehand is a different thing. But, in most occasions life offers us competitions, and at the end of the day some will be winners and some will be loosers. If this is inevitable, what is so bad about theorizing about the result? Atleast you will be mentally prepared.
Like many others you seem to indulge in the self delusion I indicated. If you are free to decide to indulge in self delusion then you are free to do so. If not then not.
I cannot fully understand the concept of self-delusion. Can you please elaborate that to me? I see it as something lying above self-reverance or narcissistic personality.
“There is only one thing a philosopher can be relied upon to do, and that is to contradict other philosophers”

– William James
User avatar
Sushan
Book of the Month Discussion Leader
Posts: 1143
Joined: February 19th, 2021, 8:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Courage vs Desperation

Post by Sushan »

Arbu123 wrote: August 21st, 2022, 4:38 pm I agree with the quote. Winners that don’t try are losers. An ugly person with no personality will get nowhere with me…if I could get anyone….😁

The idea of try is important to success. Winners are people that give it their best and succeed.
There are occasions in which people just win even without trying. And there are occasions in which people give their best, yet end up failing. If trying was the best thing (even better than winning), such a quote should have come from a winner, which we usually do not see happening.
“There is only one thing a philosopher can be relied upon to do, and that is to contradict other philosophers”

– William James
stevie
Posts: 705
Joined: July 19th, 2021, 11:08 am

Re: Courage vs Desperation

Post by stevie »

Sushan wrote: August 24th, 2022, 1:07 pm
stevie wrote: August 20th, 2022, 1:08 am
Sushan wrote: August 19th, 2022, 12:24 pm
stevie wrote: August 18th, 2022, 1:10 am

The theoretical thought fabrications about winning or losing and courage are merely driven by self-delusion. If you just do this or that depending on contextual appearances there is no need to theorize about winning or losing and courage beforehand.
Thinking (or theorizing) about winning, loosing, and courage beforehand is a different thing. But, in most occasions life offers us competitions, and at the end of the day some will be winners and some will be loosers. If this is inevitable, what is so bad about theorizing about the result? Atleast you will be mentally prepared.
Like many others you seem to indulge in the self delusion I indicated. If you are free to decide to indulge in self delusion then you are free to do so. If not then not.
I cannot fully understand the concept of self-delusion. Can you please elaborate that to me? I see it as something lying above self-reverance or narcissistic personality.
As already stated earlier I am applying the working hypothesis of "eliminative materialism" which entails that all mental phenomena are illusions (either useful, or neutral, or harmful). Therefore taking an illusion as reality is what is called "delusion".
mankind ... must act and reason and believe; though they are not able, by their most diligent enquiry, to satisfy themselves concerning the foundation of these operations, or to remove the objections, which may be raised against them [Hume]
User avatar
Sushan
Book of the Month Discussion Leader
Posts: 1143
Joined: February 19th, 2021, 8:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Courage vs Desperation

Post by Sushan »

stevie wrote: August 24th, 2022, 1:19 pm
Sushan wrote: August 24th, 2022, 1:07 pm
stevie wrote: August 20th, 2022, 1:08 am
Sushan wrote: August 19th, 2022, 12:24 pm

Thinking (or theorizing) about winning, loosing, and courage beforehand is a different thing. But, in most occasions life offers us competitions, and at the end of the day some will be winners and some will be loosers. If this is inevitable, what is so bad about theorizing about the result? Atleast you will be mentally prepared.
Like many others you seem to indulge in the self delusion I indicated. If you are free to decide to indulge in self delusion then you are free to do so. If not then not.
I cannot fully understand the concept of self-delusion. Can you please elaborate that to me? I see it as something lying above self-reverance or narcissistic personality.
As already stated earlier I am applying the working hypothesis of "eliminative materialism" which entails that all mental phenomena are illusions (either useful, or neutral, or harmful). Therefore taking an illusion as reality is what is called "delusion".
If we go into a more technical discussion all these words including delusion and illusion have seperate meanings. If we look at our particular discussion, should I take this term self-delusion as something supporting eliminative materialism, or something against that?
“There is only one thing a philosopher can be relied upon to do, and that is to contradict other philosophers”

– William James
stevie
Posts: 705
Joined: July 19th, 2021, 11:08 am

Re: Courage vs Desperation

Post by stevie »

Sushan wrote: August 24th, 2022, 10:31 pm
stevie wrote: August 24th, 2022, 1:19 pm
Sushan wrote: August 24th, 2022, 1:07 pm
stevie wrote: August 20th, 2022, 1:08 am

Like many others you seem to indulge in the self delusion I indicated. If you are free to decide to indulge in self delusion then you are free to do so. If not then not.
I cannot fully understand the concept of self-delusion. Can you please elaborate that to me? I see it as something lying above self-reverance or narcissistic personality.
As already stated earlier I am applying the working hypothesis of "eliminative materialism" which entails that all mental phenomena are illusions (either useful, or neutral, or harmful). Therefore taking an illusion as reality is what is called "delusion".
If we go into a more technical discussion all these words including delusion and illusion have seperate meanings. If we look at our particular discussion, should I take this term self-delusion as something supporting eliminative materialism, or something against that?
Since eliminative materilism eliminates itself - due to being mere concept which is a mental phenomenon - supporting/not supporting and contradicting/not contradicting do either not apply at all or do apply only as illusions.
mankind ... must act and reason and believe; though they are not able, by their most diligent enquiry, to satisfy themselves concerning the foundation of these operations, or to remove the objections, which may be raised against them [Hume]
User avatar
Sushan
Book of the Month Discussion Leader
Posts: 1143
Joined: February 19th, 2021, 8:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Courage vs Desperation

Post by Sushan »

stevie wrote: August 26th, 2022, 5:38 am
Sushan wrote: August 24th, 2022, 10:31 pm
stevie wrote: August 24th, 2022, 1:19 pm
Sushan wrote: August 24th, 2022, 1:07 pm

I cannot fully understand the concept of self-delusion. Can you please elaborate that to me? I see it as something lying above self-reverance or narcissistic personality.
As already stated earlier I am applying the working hypothesis of "eliminative materialism" which entails that all mental phenomena are illusions (either useful, or neutral, or harmful). Therefore taking an illusion as reality is what is called "delusion".
If we go into a more technical discussion all these words including delusion and illusion have seperate meanings. If we look at our particular discussion, should I take this term self-delusion as something supporting eliminative materialism, or something against that?
Since eliminative materilism eliminates itself - due to being mere concept which is a mental phenomenon - supporting/not supporting and contradicting/not contradicting do either not apply at all or do apply only as illusions.
In that case everything that we have discussed so far are mere illusions. Is there anything (excluding materialistic things) that can be taken as real?
“There is only one thing a philosopher can be relied upon to do, and that is to contradict other philosophers”

– William James
stevie
Posts: 705
Joined: July 19th, 2021, 11:08 am

Re: Courage vs Desperation

Post by stevie »

Sushan wrote: August 26th, 2022, 1:03 pm
stevie wrote: August 26th, 2022, 5:38 am
Sushan wrote: August 24th, 2022, 10:31 pm
stevie wrote: August 24th, 2022, 1:19 pm

As already stated earlier I am applying the working hypothesis of "eliminative materialism" which entails that all mental phenomena are illusions (either useful, or neutral, or harmful). Therefore taking an illusion as reality is what is called "delusion".
If we go into a more technical discussion all these words including delusion and illusion have seperate meanings. If we look at our particular discussion, should I take this term self-delusion as something supporting eliminative materialism, or something against that?
Since eliminative materilism eliminates itself - due to being mere concept which is a mental phenomenon - supporting/not supporting and contradicting/not contradicting do either not apply at all or do apply only as illusions.
In that case everything that we have discussed so far are mere illusions. Is there anything (excluding materialistic things) that can be taken as real?
Since it is a working hypothesis there is no claim about truth or reality involved. And since this working hypothesis has to be applied to itself what the working hypothesis calls "illusion" may either be an illusion or "illusion" may be itself an illusion.
So you see that the working hypothesis is of no use if it is intended to come closer to an imagined truth or reality because actually it doesn't assert anything that would require validation and leaves open everything that might be verbally expressed. So the function of this working hypothesis is merely to serve as conceptual framing for further verbal expressions in everday life and in this vein it is a perfect manifestation of a skeptical attitude.
mankind ... must act and reason and believe; though they are not able, by their most diligent enquiry, to satisfy themselves concerning the foundation of these operations, or to remove the objections, which may be raised against them [Hume]
User avatar
Sushan
Book of the Month Discussion Leader
Posts: 1143
Joined: February 19th, 2021, 8:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Courage vs Desperation

Post by Sushan »

stevie wrote: August 27th, 2022, 12:41 am
Sushan wrote: August 26th, 2022, 1:03 pm
stevie wrote: August 26th, 2022, 5:38 am
Sushan wrote: August 24th, 2022, 10:31 pm

If we go into a more technical discussion all these words including delusion and illusion have seperate meanings. If we look at our particular discussion, should I take this term self-delusion as something supporting eliminative materialism, or something against that?
Since eliminative materilism eliminates itself - due to being mere concept which is a mental phenomenon - supporting/not supporting and contradicting/not contradicting do either not apply at all or do apply only as illusions.
In that case everything that we have discussed so far are mere illusions. Is there anything (excluding materialistic things) that can be taken as real?
Since it is a working hypothesis there is no claim about truth or reality involved. And since this working hypothesis has to be applied to itself what the working hypothesis calls "illusion" may either be an illusion or "illusion" may be itself an illusion.
So you see that the working hypothesis is of no use if it is intended to come closer to an imagined truth or reality because actually it doesn't assert anything that would require validation and leaves open everything that might be verbally expressed. So the function of this working hypothesis is merely to serve as conceptual framing for further verbal expressions in everday life and in this vein it is a perfect manifestation of a skeptical attitude.
So to have a balanced discussion and to remain with an open mind we may have to suspect everything, think that everything can be an illusion (even our existence), and think that we continously just express verbal phrases to merely continue a discussion on a working hypothesis. Does this make philosophy and the related discussions useless? 🤔
“There is only one thing a philosopher can be relied upon to do, and that is to contradict other philosophers”

– William James
stevie
Posts: 705
Joined: July 19th, 2021, 11:08 am

Re: Courage vs Desperation

Post by stevie »

Sushan wrote: August 28th, 2022, 4:47 am
stevie wrote: August 27th, 2022, 12:41 am
Sushan wrote: August 26th, 2022, 1:03 pm
stevie wrote: August 26th, 2022, 5:38 am

Since eliminative materilism eliminates itself - due to being mere concept which is a mental phenomenon - supporting/not supporting and contradicting/not contradicting do either not apply at all or do apply only as illusions.
In that case everything that we have discussed so far are mere illusions. Is there anything (excluding materialistic things) that can be taken as real?
Since it is a working hypothesis there is no claim about truth or reality involved. And since this working hypothesis has to be applied to itself what the working hypothesis calls "illusion" may either be an illusion or "illusion" may be itself an illusion.
So you see that the working hypothesis is of no use if it is intended to come closer to an imagined truth or reality because actually it doesn't assert anything that would require validation and leaves open everything that might be verbally expressed. So the function of this working hypothesis is merely to serve as conceptual framing for further verbal expressions in everday life and in this vein it is a perfect manifestation of a skeptical attitude.
So to have a balanced discussion and to remain with an open mind we may have to suspect everything, think that everything can be an illusion (even our existence), and think that we continously just express verbal phrases to merely continue a discussion on a working hypothesis. Does this make philosophy and the related discussions useless? 🤔
No, we don't "have to" do anything. I for my part can take any (philosophical) perspective I like at the moment and discuss anything from that perspective. And my working hypothesis (which is a meta-perspective) doesn't have to affect your (philosophical) perspective at all.
E.g. I take every appearance but don't speculate about it being an illusion or reality, exactly because the working hypothesis is applied to itself. Thus I am applying the neo-pyrrhonist attitude:
Sextus wrote:Those who claim that the Skeptics deny appearances seem to me not to have
heard what we say. For, as we stated above, we do not reject the things that lead
us involuntarily to assent in accord with a passively received phantasia, and these
are appearances. And when we question whether the external object is such
as it appears, we grant that it does appear, and we are not raising a question about
the appearance but rather about what is said about the appearance; this is different
from raising a question about the appearance itself.
Since most philosophical discussions are about "what is said about the appearance" (e.g. it is said "illusory" or it is said "real") often there is no motivation on my side to engage in corresponding speculations but sometimes I nevertheless feel inclined to simply express how appearances appear to me without being motivated to discuss these because appearances just appear as they do and there is no need and no basis for discussing appearances.
mankind ... must act and reason and believe; though they are not able, by their most diligent enquiry, to satisfy themselves concerning the foundation of these operations, or to remove the objections, which may be raised against them [Hume]
User avatar
Sushan
Book of the Month Discussion Leader
Posts: 1143
Joined: February 19th, 2021, 8:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Courage vs Desperation

Post by Sushan »

stevie wrote: August 28th, 2022, 8:11 am
Sushan wrote: August 28th, 2022, 4:47 am
stevie wrote: August 27th, 2022, 12:41 am
Sushan wrote: August 26th, 2022, 1:03 pm

In that case everything that we have discussed so far are mere illusions. Is there anything (excluding materialistic things) that can be taken as real?
Since it is a working hypothesis there is no claim about truth or reality involved. And since this working hypothesis has to be applied to itself what the working hypothesis calls "illusion" may either be an illusion or "illusion" may be itself an illusion.
So you see that the working hypothesis is of no use if it is intended to come closer to an imagined truth or reality because actually it doesn't assert anything that would require validation and leaves open everything that might be verbally expressed. So the function of this working hypothesis is merely to serve as conceptual framing for further verbal expressions in everday life and in this vein it is a perfect manifestation of a skeptical attitude.
So to have a balanced discussion and to remain with an open mind we may have to suspect everything, think that everything can be an illusion (even our existence), and think that we continously just express verbal phrases to merely continue a discussion on a working hypothesis. Does this make philosophy and the related discussions useless? 🤔
No, we don't "have to" do anything. I for my part can take any (philosophical) perspective I like at the moment and discuss anything from that perspective. And my working hypothesis (which is a meta-perspective) doesn't have to affect your (philosophical) perspective at all.
E.g. I take every appearance but don't speculate about it being an illusion or reality, exactly because the working hypothesis is applied to itself. Thus I am applying the neo-pyrrhonist attitude:
Sextus wrote:Those who claim that the Skeptics deny appearances seem to me not to have
heard what we say. For, as we stated above, we do not reject the things that lead
us involuntarily to assent in accord with a passively received phantasia, and these
are appearances. And when we question whether the external object is such
as it appears, we grant that it does appear, and we are not raising a question about
the appearance but rather about what is said about the appearance; this is different
from raising a question about the appearance itself.
Since most philosophical discussions are about "what is said about the appearance" (e.g. it is said "illusory" or it is said "real") often there is no motivation on my side to engage in corresponding speculations but sometimes I nevertheless feel inclined to simply express how appearances appear to me without being motivated to discuss these because appearances just appear as they do and there is no need and no basis for discussing appearances.
If everything are appearances, and if there is no need for or no basis in discussing about appearances, what are we actually doing discussing various working hypotheses? Is philosophy just a waste of time?
“There is only one thing a philosopher can be relied upon to do, and that is to contradict other philosophers”

– William James
stevie
Posts: 705
Joined: July 19th, 2021, 11:08 am

Re: Courage vs Desperation

Post by stevie »

Sushan wrote: August 28th, 2022, 12:33 pm
stevie wrote: August 28th, 2022, 8:11 am
Sushan wrote: August 28th, 2022, 4:47 am
stevie wrote: August 27th, 2022, 12:41 am

Since it is a working hypothesis there is no claim about truth or reality involved. And since this working hypothesis has to be applied to itself what the working hypothesis calls "illusion" may either be an illusion or "illusion" may be itself an illusion.
So you see that the working hypothesis is of no use if it is intended to come closer to an imagined truth or reality because actually it doesn't assert anything that would require validation and leaves open everything that might be verbally expressed. So the function of this working hypothesis is merely to serve as conceptual framing for further verbal expressions in everday life and in this vein it is a perfect manifestation of a skeptical attitude.
So to have a balanced discussion and to remain with an open mind we may have to suspect everything, think that everything can be an illusion (even our existence), and think that we continously just express verbal phrases to merely continue a discussion on a working hypothesis. Does this make philosophy and the related discussions useless? 🤔
No, we don't "have to" do anything. I for my part can take any (philosophical) perspective I like at the moment and discuss anything from that perspective. And my working hypothesis (which is a meta-perspective) doesn't have to affect your (philosophical) perspective at all.
E.g. I take every appearance but don't speculate about it being an illusion or reality, exactly because the working hypothesis is applied to itself. Thus I am applying the neo-pyrrhonist attitude:
Sextus wrote:Those who claim that the Skeptics deny appearances seem to me not to have
heard what we say. For, as we stated above, we do not reject the things that lead
us involuntarily to assent in accord with a passively received phantasia, and these
are appearances. And when we question whether the external object is such
as it appears, we grant that it does appear, and we are not raising a question about
the appearance but rather about what is said about the appearance; this is different
from raising a question about the appearance itself.
Since most philosophical discussions are about "what is said about the appearance" (e.g. it is said "illusory" or it is said "real") often there is no motivation on my side to engage in corresponding speculations but sometimes I nevertheless feel inclined to simply express how appearances appear to me without being motivated to discuss these because appearances just appear as they do and there is no need and no basis for discussing appearances.
If everything are appearances, and if there is no need for or no basis in discussing about appearances, what are we actually doing discussing various working hypotheses? Is philosophy just a waste of time?
As already expressed elsewhere philosophy seems to be a phenomenon caused by the brains extraordinary computational capacity being led astray by itself. Philosophy isn't needed for everyday life and survival which functions because individuals just follow appearances without needing to speculate about them.
Nevertheless once entangled in the net of ultimately useless philosophy there is no way out other than applying philosophical thinking. But if one never gets entangled but just follows appearances there is no lack.
mankind ... must act and reason and believe; though they are not able, by their most diligent enquiry, to satisfy themselves concerning the foundation of these operations, or to remove the objections, which may be raised against them [Hume]
User avatar
WindowtotheWorld
Posts: 14
Joined: April 23rd, 2022, 2:35 pm

Re: Courage vs Desperation

Post by WindowtotheWorld »

To be courageous means being willing to face loss. Without this "facewardness" in the direction of pain or uncertainty, there can be no courage.

You can have daring, but not courage. To dare is only the preliminary step. However, it may take some courage to initially dare -- but once you've made that initial dare that required courage and henceforth only close your eyes and ears in denial of what's in front of you, well, that's the beginning of cowardice.

To be desperate means in some sense to have a relation to loss. So both of them are alike in that respect. But desperation is not a virtue (anyone can despair) - though it may be complimented by virtue - namely, what you bring to the table in response to that desperation, what you do with it. That shows your mettle in a way, and courage also has to do with proving your mettle.

I would also say that for all these reasons having a meaning for living, even an absurd one, is an essential component. And that leads on to self-worth. In the end it's about valuing yourself and others that gives purpose to life. In a way all these things are connected I think. Value and meaning.
Post Reply

Return to “Living in Color: A Love Story, In Sickness and in Health by Mike Murphy”

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

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