The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me
Post Reply
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 15500
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by Sy Borg »

value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 10:41 am
Sy Borg wrote: October 12th, 2023, 4:46 pmLife is inherently harsh. In order to live, we have no choice but to kill and exploit other living entities. Further, we are talking about humans here ... humans who kill other humans, have wiped most animals off the face of the Earth and filled their faces with animals flesh with glee at every opportunity. Not that humans are inherently bad. Any species with our empowerment would be similarly dominant, and we have much evidence that other empowered predatory species like chimps, dolphins and orcas can also be cruel.
My perspective is the following:

Barbarians reflect on cruelty in nature to fuel cruelty. Moral beings reflect on reason to become reasonable. The potential for philosophy shows what path is right to choose.
Then I am proud to be a barbarian and consider such "moral beings" to be living in Fantasy Land.

It's clear that in actual reality, eight billion humans are utterly incapable of being reasonable en masse. In fact, humans en masse have never at any stage displayed reason over a sustained period.

value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 10:41 am
Sy Borg wrote: October 17th, 2023, 5:50 pmThere's eight billion people on a planet that is already far less bountiful than it was a mere century ago in the midst of an extinction event. Someone's got to die - and in big numbers, because it's significantly unsustainable. This huge population locks in future catastrophes with unprecedented death tolls.
That's an horrific perspective in my opinion. Elon Musk recently wrote the following about it on Twitter in response to a viral video in which primatologist Jane Goodall argued that it would be best for the planet when the human population would be 90% reduced.
I did not provide a perspective, I spoke of an absolute certainty. Anyone who is not in denial would agree.

It perplexes me how often people - even on a philosophy forum FFS!! - cannot tell the difference between observation and endorsement.
value
Premium Member
Posts: 770
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by value »

value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 10:41 amMy perspective is the following:

Barbarians reflect on cruelty in nature to fuel cruelty. Moral beings reflect on reason to become reasonable. The potential for philosophy shows what path is right to choose.
Sy Borg wrote: October 18th, 2023, 2:56 pmThen I am proud to be a barbarian and consider such "moral beings" to be living in Fantasy Land.

It's clear that in actual reality, eight billion humans are utterly incapable of being reasonable en masse. In fact, humans en masse have never at any stage displayed reason over a sustained period.
What interests me more is why you are even speaking about it if you were to be correct.

I am currently finishing The Principles of Psychology vol 2. by William James and came across a chapter in which he described the bestial nature of humanity. He mentioned the following in his works ‘Remarks at the Peace Banquet’ and ‘The Moral Equivalent of War’:

The plain truth is that people want war. They want it anyhow; for itself; and apart from each and every possible consequence. It is the final bouquet of life’s fireworks. The born soldiers want it hot and actual. The non-combatants want it in the background, and always as an open possibility, to feed imagination on and keep excitement going.

Why the effort for an anti-war philosophy then, one wonders? Is William James somehow different from 'people' due to his intelligence or specialism in human psychology? Is Pattern-chaser different from 'the human specie' due to his being a self-proclaimed gaian-daoist?

Why would otherwise than war and bestiality be possible, as can be seen in the moral theory/vision developed by the philosophers who held a view such as William James, one of the founders of pacifism? Why would one intend to 'strive against nature' and formulate a moral theory that prevents war?

Those philosophers seem to have been motivated to go against their reflection on human nature in history. Why?

American philosopher Henry David Thoreau provides an insight that may explain the motivation for the philosophical effort of anti-war philosophers. Thoreau once said the following about the evolution of human morality:

"Whatever my own practice may be, I have no doubt that it is a part of the destiny of the human race, in its gradual improvement, to leave off eating animals, as surely as the savage tribes have left off eating each other when they came in contact with the more civilized."

The behavior observed in newer generations of people supports Thoreau's assertion about the evolution of morality in human culture. Humans are gradually improving their moral behavior, just as Thoreau predicted. Millennials (Gen Y) have been driving a global shift away from eating animals for moral consideration and Gen Z is accelerating a shift to veganism.

Then rests the question: why would humanity improve morally?

And there comes in the profound importance of the work of Jewish philosopher Emmanuel Lévinas - an icon of Western philosophy that is researched by dedicated scholars today - with his concept eschatological vision that by its possibility proves that humanity has an intellectual responsibility to be ethical and respectful to others.

The possibility of eschatological vision is what I meant with 'the possibility of philosophy' and how that possibility would 'show the right path to choose' when it comes to either reflecting on cruelty on nature or reflecting on reason.

Of peace there can only be an eschatology.
...
This "beyond" the totality and objective experience is, however, not to be described in a purely negative fashion. It is reflected within experience. The eschatological, as the "beyond" of history, draws beings out of the jurisdiction of history and the future; it arouses them in and calls them forth to their full responsibility.
...
The idea of being overflowing history makes possible existents both involved in being and personal, called upon to answer as their trial and consequently already adult - but, for that very reason, existents that can speak rather than lending their lips to an anonymous utterance of history.

Peace is produced as this aptitude for speech. The eschatological vision breaks with the totality of wars and empires in which one does not speak. It does not envisage the end of history within being understood as a totality, but institutes a relation with the infinity of being which exceeds the totality.

The first "vision" of eschatology (hereby distinguished from the revealed opinions of positive religions) reveals the very possibility of eschatology, that is, the breach of the totality, the possibility of a signification without context. The experience of morality does not proceed from this vision - it consummates this vision; ethics is an optics. But it is a vision without image, bereft of the synoptics and totalizing objectifying virtues of vision, a relation or an intentionality of a wholly different type - which this work seeks to describe."



Pattern-chaser asked the following a few posts back:
Pattern-chaser wrote: October 18th, 2023, 10:48 am
value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 10:41 am I believe that reason can overcome darkness before it was ever present. There is simply no place for Evil in the context of reason and thus is there no place for anxiety and fear.
There is no place for Evil in the context of reason only because that context does not admit subjective value judgements like "good" or "evil", yes? 🤔
In the context of reason there is just good because reason is an intellectual pursuit of good.

Ethically, there can be no justification for acts that originate from a lack of reason. One can hide behind error, but error should not be the intended result. Therefore barbarism such as war, violence, revenge or cruelty should be prevented on behalf of reason.

In practice, morality can be seen as an intellectual capacity that is dependent on the potential for moral consideration and that potential needs to be facilitated in some way, which is done through culture.

A cultural demand is a very strong demand which explains the cited vision of Henry David Thoreau with regard the moral evolution (civilization) of humanity.

Culture is shaped by philosophy and therefore my conclusion is that philosophy should be held responsible.


Sy Borg wrote: October 17th, 2023, 5:50 pm
value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 10:41 am
Sy Borg wrote: October 17th, 2023, 5:50 pmThere's eight billion people on a planet that is already far less bountiful than it was a mere century ago in the midst of an extinction event. Someone's got to die - and in big numbers, because it's significantly unsustainable. This huge population locks in future catastrophes with unprecedented death tolls.
That's an horrific perspective in my opinion. Elon Musk recently wrote the following about it on Twitter in response to a viral video in which primatologist Jane Goodall argued that it would be best for the planet when the human population would be 90% reduced.
I did not provide a perspective, I spoke of an absolute certainty. Anyone who is not in denial would agree.

It perplexes me how often people - even on a philosophy forum FFS!! - cannot tell the difference between observation and endorsement.
What do you think of Elon Musk his argument that with proper (wise) management the planet can support many billions more people than the amount of people that inhabit earth today?

It is said that with a transition to micro algae based food innovation, the planet can not only support billions of more people, who have the ability to become significantly more healthy than humans today and even much beyond that (top sport performance capacity), but would also improve the health of the planet on the long term when humans would cultivate those algae.

(2022) 🦠 Microalgae are nature’s ‘green gold’
Abundant sustainable food of the future to end global hunger. Algae offers the advantage of requiring neither soil nor pesticides nor irrigation. On top of that it provides enormous ecosystem services, creating a very rich habitat for fauna (shellfish, fish) and flora while also feeding the top of the ocean food chain (phytoplankton, bivalves) and ultimately animals.
https://phys.org/news/2022-09-microalga ... nment.html

(2020) Potential of Chlorella Algae to Promote Human Health
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7551956/
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 15500
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by Sy Borg »

value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 6:02 pm
value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 10:41 amMy perspective is the following:

Barbarians reflect on cruelty in nature to fuel cruelty. Moral beings reflect on reason to become reasonable. The potential for philosophy shows what path is right to choose.
Sy Borg wrote: October 18th, 2023, 2:56 pmThen I am proud to be a barbarian and consider such "moral beings" to be living in Fantasy Land.

It's clear that in actual reality, eight billion humans are utterly incapable of being reasonable en masse. In fact, humans en masse have never at any stage displayed reason over a sustained period.
What interests me more is why you are even speaking about it if you were to be correct.

I am currently finishing The Principles of Psychology vol 2. by William James and came across a chapter in which he described the bestial nature of humanity. He mentioned the following in his works ‘Remarks at the Peace Banquet’ and ‘The Moral Equivalent of War’:

The plain truth is that people want war. They want it anyhow; for itself; and apart from each and every possible consequence. It is the final bouquet of life’s fireworks. The born soldiers want it hot and actual. The non-combatants want it in the background, and always as an open possibility, to feed imagination on and keep excitement going.

Why the effort for an anti-war philosophy then, one wonders? Is William James somehow different from 'people' due to his intelligence or specialism in human psychology? Is Pattern-chaser different from 'the human specie' due to his being a self-proclaimed gaian-daoist?

Why would otherwise than war and bestiality be possible, as can be seen in the moral theory/vision developed by the philosophers who held a view such as William James, one of the founders of pacifism? Why would one intend to 'strive against nature' and formulate a moral theory that prevents war?

Those philosophers seem to have been motivated to go against their reflection on human nature in history. Why?
Either William James's relationship with reality is tenuous or he was having an emotional moment. People want war? That is nonsense.

Most people hate war, but sometimes attacks happen and one must defend oneself. Sometimes war benefits powerful minorities and they can manipulate the masses to rally around them. The problem is that, it only takes one militant war lover amongst millions to trigger major massacres. Ideally, the millions would lynch anyone who'd conduct rash attacks and bring hell down on the people, but humans are not rational agents. Often they will lionise those who screw them the hardest.

It does not matter how much certain groups coordinate and civilise, globally there is no accord. Further, even when groups coordinate and civilise, they will take backward steps. Or the society might simply fail altogether. In the meantime, rifts are widening and the chances of global cooperation on any issue is becoming ever less likely.

value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 6:02 pmWhat do you think of Elon Musk his argument that with proper (wise) management the planet can support many billions more people than the amount of people that inhabit earth today?

It is said that with a transition to micro algae based food innovation, the planet can not only support billions of more people, who have the ability to become significantly more healthy than humans today and even much beyond that (top sport performance capacity), but would also improve the health of the planet on the long term when humans would cultivate those algae.
I think that Elon Musk

(2022) 🦠 Microalgae are nature’s ‘green gold’
Abundant sustainable food of the future to end global hunger. Algae offers the advantage of requiring neither soil nor pesticides nor irrigation. On top of that it provides enormous ecosystem services, creating a very rich habitat for fauna (shellfish, fish) and flora while also feeding the top of the ocean food chain (phytoplankton, bivalves) and ultimately animals.
https://phys.org/news/2022-09-microalga ... nment.html

(2020) Potential of Chlorella Algae to Promote Human Health
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7551956/
[/quote]
Either Elon Musk's relationship with reality is tenuous or he was having an emotional moment. This is because Elon swans around the world in private jets rather than living in a cage complex in Hong Kong, living under a rag on a stick in one of Africa's many wars, and living out on cold city streets. I expect the view from his vantage point is fabulous.

The planet can support many more billions? That is nonsense. The planet is far from being able to sustain eight billion.

I'm suppose the planet could support more people if:

- humans no longer behave like humans, and instead all become saint-like
- climate change was not already happening
- most ecosystems weren't already destroyed or diminished
- if most large species (including keystone species) weren't endangered
- if corporations and billionaires paid proportionately as much tax as any one else.
value
Premium Member
Posts: 770
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by value »

Sy Borg wrote: October 16th, 2023, 1:54 am We human are not in control. The Earth is.
Consul wrote: October 16th, 2023, 2:02 amThe Earth doesn't make any political decisions like constructing nuclear weapons and declaring war.
Perhaps Sy Borg could be right. What is the source of the wisdom that might result in political decisions and war?

It seems to me that ultimately it is about serving the purpose of life in the best way possible. Bestiality and cruelty in history are no reasonable ground to fuel such practices in the future so in my opinion one is to look solely at philosophy, the intellectual striving to 'serve life in the most wise way possible', and then the idea that Earth is in control might be a valid idea.

I once hiked with someone with an European nationality who told me about his visit to Iran where he hiked the country and met with local people. He told me that the people were exceptionally kind and welcoming. If it were to be all about 'political decisions and nuclear weapons', how could that be explained?

Iranian People: Are They Really As Nice As Travellers Say?
https://www.goatsontheroad.com/iranian- ... eople-say/

I believe that the philosophy of Pattern-chaser (Gaian-daoism) might be a very good philosophy as it seeks to make humans adhere to a greater moral responsibility on an Earth level and the (philosophical) attempt to do so can nudge people on the right track for a Levinas style eschatological vision that I described in my previous post, that can result in actual peace (a sort of peace without a contextual ground).

Peace opposed to war is peace based on war. To overcome war fundamentally requires a Levinas style eschatological vision of peace.

An eschatological vision of peace is 'peace by itself' as it were, or "beyond the word peace". It isn't about peace but about what lays beyond.
value
Premium Member
Posts: 770
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by value »

Sy Borg wrote: October 16th, 2023, 1:54 am We human are not in control. The Earth is.
Consul wrote: October 16th, 2023, 2:02 amThe Earth doesn't make any political decisions like constructing nuclear weapons and declaring war.
In my previous reply I mentioned that philosophy is to be held responsible.

Besides the history that is discussed in this topic, a factor for consideration that might drive certain actors is philosophy. There appears to be 'interpretations of the Bible' that prophetised a catastrophic war.

Some argue that the war in Israel is related to Luke 21:24. The verse states that Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles (foreign nations and people) until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. Some argue that the current conflict in Israel is a precursor to a future time of tribulation, as prophesied in Luke 21 and other parts of the Bible. They see the conflict as a sign of the end times and the return of Jesus.

(2023) War in Israel: A Fulfillment of Bible Prophecy?
https://harvest.org/resources/gregs-blo ... -prophecy/

Some quotes from Luke 21:24:

“Teacher, but when will these things be? And what sign will there be when these things are about to take place?”

Then He said to them, “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. 11 And there will be great earthquakes in various places, and famines and pestilences; and there will be fearful sights and great signs from heaven. 12 But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons. You will be brought before kings and rulers for My name’s sake."

“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. ... And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled." (Gentiles = 'foreign nations and people')

"Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near.”

"... it will come as a snare on all those who dwell on the face of the whole earth. Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass ...”

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... rsion=NKJV

With such ideas, which is vitally 'philosophy', people can be driven to acts of destruction and war while reason per se might not have motivated them to perform those acts.

People are capable of a lot for a belief or idea, as is evident from cults in which people collectively commit suicide.

The cited article states the following as a conclusion:

"The Bible tells us to pray for the peace of Jerusalem (Psalm 122:6). We want to pray that they arrive at some kind of peace. We want to pray that this horrific terrorism stops."

Intention is where it all begins!

Therefore it is my opinion that philosophy can be a solution. The work of for example Emmanuel Levinas shows what the human is capable of intellectually and morally. That few people can understand his work, is a problem, but that problem can be overcome through cultural evolution. It would concern 'chewing out' the complexity of theoretical thought into bits of practical wisdom.

Emmanuel Levinas is one of the greatest thinkers of the twentieth, but the complexity of his thought, as well as Heidegger’s, prevents a real spread / democratization of his work. One of his most important works is Totality and Infinity: An essay on exteriority. In the latter, Levinas, according to a phenomenological method, describes how subjectivity arises from the idea of ​​infinity, and how infinite is a product of the relationship of self to another.

Levinas' work and eschatological vision for peace can counter the ideas proposed by Luke 21:24 by emphasizing the importance of ethics, responsibility, and peace in the present moment, rather than waiting for a future event to bring about peace.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 15500
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by Sy Borg »

value wrote: October 19th, 2023, 2:32 am
Sy Borg wrote: October 16th, 2023, 1:54 am We human are not in control. The Earth is.
Consul wrote: October 16th, 2023, 2:02 amThe Earth doesn't make any political decisions like constructing nuclear weapons and declaring war.
Perhaps Sy Borg could be right. What is the source of the wisdom that might result in political decisions and war?
The Earth has been making political decisions like declaring war for many millions of years, and it has been constructing nuclear weapons for about 78 years.

Why do volcanoes blow or destructive storms form? Volcanoes blow due to a break in the Earth's crust due to pressure caused by magma and gas. Storms form due to a break in the thermal structure of the atmosphere, caused by large bodies of air. War is a break in civilisation caused by a buildup of pressure. Nuclear bombs were created due to a breakthrough in our understanding of the relationship between matter and energy and also due to a break in morality driven by fear.

Of course we aspire to do the best we can but, ultimately, humanity en masse has never been in control. If there was a world government strong enough to keep the interests and instincts of everyone in the world under strict and constant control, would you want live that way?

Maybe only Leto II, the worm god, can take such control? Or AI.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8727
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by Pattern-chaser »

value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 6:02 pm In the context of reason there is just good because reason is an intellectual pursuit of good.
"An intellectual pursuit of good" what? "Good" is not something that can be pursued. "Good" is like "adequate" or "beautiful", or "disgusting", and so on. It is the result of a human subjective value judgement. So I ask, what is the 'good' of reason? I'm not asking for a justification of reason, I could come up with plenty of them on my own. I'm asking what is the 'good' of reason, that you can "pursue"?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8727
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by Pattern-chaser »

value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 6:02 pm Culture is shaped by philosophy and therefore my conclusion is that philosophy should be held responsible.
And yet philosophy is shaped by culture, so perhaps we should conclude that culture is responsible? Science is shaped by culture, as is anything that humans have created or invented. Donald Trump, as we have all come to know him, is more a cultural artefact than a person. So perhaps we should be holding culture to account?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Lagayscienza
Posts: 2435
Joined: February 8th, 2015, 3:27 am
Favorite Philosopher: Hume Nietzsche
Location: Antipodes

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by Lagayscienza »

At the heart of this debacle are fanatics from two incompatible religions. Both sides think their gods want them rule this land and to oust the infidels on the other side. Maybe if they could let go of their gods, even briefly, they would be able to see that they are both, first and foremost, human beings with the same desires for themselves, their families and their societies to live in peace and security. Seeing themselves first and foremost as human being, and not religious beings, is the minimum requirement needed to fix this appalling state of affairs so that all people in the Middle East can live peacefully and prosper. A two state solution may be the answer. Maybe they could live together. But until they can stop thinking that their side alone has a god given right to this land, it's hard to see this never ending nightmare coming to a close.
La Gaya Scienza
value
Premium Member
Posts: 770
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by value »

value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 6:02 pm Culture is shaped by philosophy and therefore my conclusion is that philosophy should be held responsible.
Pattern-chaser wrote: October 19th, 2023, 9:08 amAnd yet philosophy is shaped by culture, so perhaps we should conclude that culture is responsible? Science is shaped by culture, as is anything that humans have created or invented. Donald Trump, as we have all come to know him, is more a cultural artefact than a person. So perhaps we should be holding culture to account?
When you would argue that philosophy is shaped by culture, it would need to be a cultural 'belief' as a bias (deviation) of what is pure philosophy, which is dogmatism. Pure philosophy has nothing to do with belief per se and is not 'shaped' by it. Pure philosophy is not about opinion.

At most one could argue that philosophy would 'reflect' on culture but that is not the shaping of philosophy other than how anything else in the world can inform philosophy.

The pioneering moral philosophy of Levinas describes a concept that has no foundational context. That is what philosophy is capable of. To transcend and overcome beliefs and dogma's in the pursuit of both truth and ought combined (the moral good wholly as it were that 'includes' the scientific truth, which philosophy actually invented itself).

Philosophy is a more whole pursuit than 'knitting science', as a user once remarked in the OP of one of the most profound and popular topics on this forum, "On the absurd hegemony of science", in which even prominent philosopher and well-known public figure Daniel C. Dennett appears to have actively participated with hundreds of replies (evidence here).
Hereandnow wrote: August 19th, 2020, 9:06 amAll this means that when science makes its moves to "say" what the world is, it is only right within the scope of its field. But philosophy, which is the most open field, has no business yielding to this any more than to knitting "science" or masonry. Philosophy is all inclusive theory, and the attempt to fit such a thing into a scientific paradigm is simply perverse.

Science: know your place! It is not philosophy.
So I would argue that your assertion would be incorrect. Culture is shaped by philosophy and not the other way around. Philosophy might even be considered the source of the world, of the Universe, where it all begins as it were.
value
Premium Member
Posts: 770
Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by value »

value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 6:02 pm In the context of reason there is just good because reason is an intellectual pursuit of good.
Pattern-chaser wrote: October 19th, 2023, 9:04 am"An intellectual pursuit of good" what? "Good" is not something that can be pursued. "Good" is like "adequate" or "beautiful", or "disgusting", and so on. It is the result of a human subjective value judgement. So I ask, what is the 'good' of reason? I'm not asking for a justification of reason, I could come up with plenty of them on my own. I'm asking what is the 'good' of reason, that you can "pursue"?
The evidence for good can be found in the simple question "What is good?". Because it is a valid question, good is not just a subjective concept. Nor is good objective, because if that were to be so the question wouldn't have meaning and wouldn't be a valid question.

Good can only be found in the question and not in the answer.

Reasoning is the eternal process of fulfilment of the question and therefore it can be described as an intellectual pursuit of good.

Levinas concluded his major philosophical work with the following assertion:

"The creation of the world itself should get its meaning starting from goodness." (Levinas in film Absent God 1:06:22)

I would disagree with this assertion since it refers good as a retro-perspective origin of the world while in reality, signification isn't foundationally bound by a biased concept such as 'written down' good and instead finds Good in the process of finding it, and not in the context of 'having found it'.

The intellectual pursuit of Good would be like an eternal process, like an ouroboros. The beginning of the world is also the purpose of the world.

My primary assertion is: it is philosophy! Philosophy (the process of reasoning in pursuit of 'what can be considered' good) is a direct exponent of the signification that fundamentally underlays the world. And therefore pure philosophy can overcome cultural bias and dogma's and secure an optimal moral path for humanity and beyond.

In the context of reason there is no place for evil.

Kant wrote in "Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason,": "pure reason is the faculty of concepts, and concepts are not concerned with the inclinations, but only with the understanding and its object"

Therefore, according to Kant (who authored one of the most profound works on reason), pure reason cannot be the source of evil, which arises from the inclinations and desires of the human will. Kant believed that every human being has the capacity to resist evil and choose the moral path, which is the path of reason.

Scientific evidence can be found in the topic Nature vs nurture or beyond... ?.

To return to the topic.

On Twitter I wrote:
Twitter wrote:Please don't forget people like Jewish #philosopher #Levinas (peace movement). Choose your own path. Don't become like the evil doers. To be brave is to do good in the face of evil.

Make the decision: break the cycle of violence. Just get it done.

My assertion: "Barbarians reflect on cruelty in nature to fuel cruelty. Moral beings reflect on reason to become reasonable. The potential for philosophy shows what path is right to choose."

The cited potential is the same potential that is described by Levinas in his work Totality and Infinity, of which he asserts that it is the only ground for 'actual peace'.

Peace opposed to war is peace based on war. To overcome war fundamentally requires a Levinas style eschatological vision of peace.

A Levinas style eschatological vision of peace is 'peace by itself' as it were, or "beyond the word peace". It isn't about peace but about what lays beyond. And that is what philosophy can provide and therefore my conclusion is that philosophy should be held responsible.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8727
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by Pattern-chaser »

value wrote: October 18th, 2023, 6:02 pm Culture is shaped by philosophy and therefore my conclusion is that philosophy should be held responsible.
Pattern-chaser wrote: October 19th, 2023, 9:08 amAnd yet philosophy is shaped by culture, so perhaps we should conclude that culture is responsible? Science is shaped by culture, as is anything that humans have created or invented. Donald Trump, as we have all come to know him, is more a cultural artefact than a person. So perhaps we should be holding culture to account?
value wrote: October 19th, 2023, 5:25 pm When you would argue that philosophy is shaped by culture, it would need to be a cultural 'belief' as a bias (deviation) of what is pure philosophy, which is dogmatism. Pure philosophy has nothing to do with belief per se and is not 'shaped' by it. Pure philosophy is not about opinion.

At most one could argue that philosophy would 'reflect' on culture but that is not the shaping of philosophy other than how anything else in the world can inform philosophy.

[...]

So I would argue that your assertion would be incorrect. Culture is shaped by philosophy and not the other way around. Philosophy might even be considered the source of the world, of the Universe, where it all begins as it were.
OK, I withdraw my comment. It wasn't really an arguable position, on reflection. I was (over-)reacting to your statement that "culture is shaped by philosophy", which I believe to be a misunderstanding. Philosophy is part of human culture, as are science, maths, politics, history, geography, art, fashion, and any other human invention/creation we can think of. Culture is the parent; philosophy is the 'child'.

Philosophy is a hobby practised by a small minority of humans. It does not have the position or influence that you ascribe to it, IMO. And I am not clear even on whether philosophy *should* have the position and influence you ascribe to it.
Last edited by Pattern-chaser on October 20th, 2023, 10:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Lagayscienza
Posts: 2435
Joined: February 8th, 2015, 3:27 am
Favorite Philosopher: Hume Nietzsche
Location: Antipodes

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by Lagayscienza »

Philosophy is a hobby practised by a small minority of humans. It does not have the position or influence that you ascribe to it, IMO. And I am not clear even on whether philosophy *should* have the position and influence you ascribe to it.
That's true. Philosophy as a pursuit for those who have an armchair and lots of quiet time. Most folks are too busy trying to earn enough to pay the rent and still eat. In Gaza right now, most are not even concerned with that. Their main worry is how to remain alive until tomorrow. Philosophical questions would be the last things on their minds.
La Gaya Scienza
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8727
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Pattern-chaser wrote:Philosophy is a hobby practised by a small minority of humans. It does not have the position or influence that you ascribe to it, IMO. And I am not clear even on whether philosophy *should* have the position and influence you ascribe to it.
Lagayscienza wrote: October 20th, 2023, 9:05 am That's true. Philosophy as a pursuit for those who have an armchair and lots of quiet time. Most folks are too busy trying to earn enough to pay the rent and still eat. In Gaza right now, most are not even concerned with that. Their main worry is how to remain alive until tomorrow. Philosophical questions would be the last things on their minds.
Yes, and in the context of what I said before, the people of Gaza have no time for philosophy, just at the moment, but they are up to their eyeballs in the 'no-go' areas of human culture (using "culture" in the widest possible sense, as I described earlier).
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
Good_Egg
Posts: 849
Joined: January 27th, 2022, 5:12 am

Re: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Post by Good_Egg »

A cynic might say that there has never been peace in the particular corner of the Middle East that we're talking about. Only periods of posturing between periods of fighting....

It's clearly possible (but not necessarily desirable) to take a cynical attitude. More violence in the Middle East ? Nothing newsworthy there then..

It's also possible (but not necessarily desirable) to take sides. To lament the suffering of side A and condemn the violence of side B but play down the violence of A and the suffering of B.

I believe that there is a Christian heresy best described as "victim culture". Which at its most extreme approaches every question by asking "who are the victims?" and then adopting the attitude that the identified victim-group can do no wrong.

Is there another way ? A way that is non-partisan, disinterested, without being dismissive and uninterested ?

A way that holds to an impartial ethic of how people should behave, and attempts to hold both sides to it ? That sympathizes with the legitimate aims on both sides whilst condemning any and all ethically-illegitimate means ?

Is that not what philosophy is for ? To hold to the hope that humans will do better, even while acknowledging that the cynics seem to have a large part of the truth ? Seeking clarity as to what "better" is.
"Opinions are fiercest.. ..when the evidence to support or refute them is weakest" - Druin Burch
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Politics”

2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Advent of Time: A Solution to the Problem of Evil...

The Advent of Time: A Solution to the Problem of Evil...
by Indignus Servus
November 2024

Reconceptualizing Mental Illness in the Digital Age

Reconceptualizing Mental Illness in the Digital Age
by Elliott B. Martin, Jr.
October 2024

How is God Involved in Evolution?

How is God Involved in Evolution?
by Joe P. Provenzano, Ron D. Morgan, and Dan R. Provenzano
August 2024

Launchpad Republic: America's Entrepreneurial Edge and Why It Matters

Launchpad Republic: America's Entrepreneurial Edge and Why It Matters
by Howard Wolk
July 2024

Quest: Finding Freddie: Reflections from the Other Side

Quest: Finding Freddie: Reflections from the Other Side
by Thomas Richard Spradlin
June 2024

Neither Safe Nor Effective

Neither Safe Nor Effective
by Dr. Colleen Huber
May 2024

Now or Never

Now or Never
by Mary Wasche
April 2024

Meditations

Meditations
by Marcus Aurelius
March 2024

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

The In-Between: Life in the Micro

The In-Between: Life in the Micro
by Christian Espinosa
January 2024

2023 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

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