Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[gad-fly]

A philosopher is characterized by his propensity to philosophize. Conversely, he who philosophizes is not necessarily a philosopher, even if he is so inclined to call himself. Is a philosopher smarter than you and me? In general, No. He likes to think, but he is not exactly a thinker. The difference is that once he starts thinking, he would have difficulty to call it a day. If he is not stopped, he would go on and on till thy kingdom come. I would give him a clap of hands before leaving him alone, provided he can allow me to go.

What bothers a philosopher most is that thinking has become his dominant addiction. He will think even if the case is apparent if not self-evident. He is looking for trouble, no doubt. What bothers you is how to calm him down without intoxication or hit on the head. One saving grace: he is non-violent. Left alone, he will self-entertain. You can even bundle his kind together to save room, as you are about to gingerly sneak away.

How does a philosopher earn his keep? Most of them don't. Not to worry, though. They are usually self-sufficient.

What does a philosopher serve? He opens up your mind to diverse angles, angles which you would not even think of exploring in the first place, but you have to be vigilant. Many of those angles are blind corners and dead-ends, and you only have yourself to blame if you are caught in the deep end and unable to extricate.

Would you like to become one? Sorry, but mostly you don't have a choice. Some says it is in your genes. Would I like to become one? Thanks but no thanks, if I may. Why? I have more important concerns in this world.

[Sunday66]

A philosopher is characterized by his propensity to philosophize. Conversely, he who philosophizes is not necessarily a philosopher, even if he is so inclined to call himself. Is a philosopher smarter than you and me? In general, No. He likes to think, but he is not exactly a thinker. The difference is that once he starts thinking, he would have difficulty to call it a day. If he is not stopped, he would go on and on till thy kingdom come. I would give him a clap of hands before leaving him alone, provided he can allow me to go.

What bothers a philosopher most is that thinking has become his dominant addiction. He will think even if the case is apparent if not self-evident. He is looking for trouble, no doubt. What bothers you is how to calm him down without intoxication or hit on the head. One saving grace: he is non-violent. Left alone, he will self-entertain. You can even bundle his kind together to save room, as you are about to gingerly sneak away.

How does a philosopher earn his keep? Most of them don't. Not to worry, though. They are usually self-sufficient.

What does a philosopher serve? He opens up your mind to diverse angles, angles which you would not even think of exploring in the first place, but you have to be vigilant. Many of those angles are blind corners and dead-ends, and you only have yourself to blame if you are caught in the deep end and unable to extricate.

Would you like to become one? Sorry, but mostly you don't have a choice. Some says it is in your genes. Would I like to become one? Thanks but no thanks, if I may. Why? I have more important concerns in this world.

this forum is garbage. bunch of jerkoffs bashing philosophy

[JackDaydream]

A philosopher is characterized by his propensity to philosophize. Conversely, he who philosophizes is not necessarily a philosopher, even if he is so inclined to call himself. Is a philosopher smarter than you and me? In general, No. He likes to think, but he is not exactly a thinker. The difference is that once he starts thinking, he would have difficulty to call it a day. If he is not stopped, he would go on and on till thy kingdom come. I would give him a clap of hands before leaving him alone, provided he can allow me to go.

What bothers a philosopher most is that thinking has become his dominant addiction. He will think even if the case is apparent if not self-evident. He is looking for trouble, no doubt. What bothers you is how to calm him down without intoxication or hit on the head. One saving grace: he is non-violent. Left alone, he will self-entertain. You can even bundle his kind together to save room, as you are about to gingerly sneak away.

How does a philosopher earn his keep? Most of them don't. Not to worry, though. They are usually self-sufficient.

What does a philosopher serve? He opens up your mind to diverse angles, angles which you would not even think of exploring in the first place, but you have to be vigilant. Many of those angles are blind corners and dead-ends, and you only have yourself to blame if you are caught in the deep end and unable to extricate.

Would you like to become one? Sorry, but mostly you don't have a choice. Some says it is in your genes. Would I like to become one? Thanks but no thanks, if I may. Why? I have more important concerns in this world.

The issue with being a philosopher is that it is a term which can be used in various ways. It may be better to call another person than claim the title for oneself, because it would come across as a bit grandiose to refer to claim to be one. But, there are certain markers like having studied it, being a teacher or lecturer. Also, having published writing as a philosopher is an important distinction.

However, it is a fluid concept like artists, which may be regarded as amateur or professional, and even this can be arbitrary and variable as a label. In some ways, as philosophy is about thinking everyone is a philosopher in some ways and it may be about how one chooses to develop this. It is also about the practice alone and recognition by others for the status and level of thinking. It may also be about the love of the pursuit of knowledge. The way I see myself using the forum is almost like pretending to be a philosopher. However, I take it seriously with my reading for it, and, at times I get too serious about it all, especially when I get wound up about it all. In some ways, I do try to keep a sense of humour and not take myself too seriously. That is because then it can become a passion which becomes too heavy and intense.
.

[gad-fly]

The way I see myself using the forum is almost like pretending to be a philosopher. However, I take it seriously with my reading for it, and, at times I get too serious about it all, especially when I get wound up about it all. In some ways, I do try to keep a sense of humour and not take myself too seriously. That is because then it can become a passion which becomes too heavy and intense.

Hey, there is nothing wrong to take philosophy and yourself seriously. if you feel deserved to be called yourself a philosopher, writer, artist, and so on, call yourself one. Care not what others think. Respect yourself. It is what you deserve, and what you would base moving to higher ground.

You can also be a sometime philosopher. Play different roles. Show commonsense to dispel absurd and empty philosophical arguments. For me, I always read the title in the forum first. If the title is "A topic", i would pass. If the title is " Consciousness more real than time", I would also pass.

[stevie]

A philosopher is characterized by his propensity to philosophize. Conversely, he who philosophizes is not necessarily a philosopher, even if he is so inclined to call himself. Is a philosopher smarter than you and me? In general, No. He likes to think, but he is not exactly a thinker. The difference is that once he starts thinking, he would have difficulty to call it a day. If he is not stopped, he would go on and on till thy kingdom come. I would give him a clap of hands before leaving him alone, provided he can allow me to go.

What bothers a philosopher most is that thinking has become his dominant addiction. He will think even if the case is apparent if not self-evident. He is looking for trouble, no doubt. What bothers you is how to calm him down without intoxication or hit on the head. One saving grace: he is non-violent. Left alone, he will self-entertain. You can even bundle his kind together to save room, as you are about to gingerly sneak away.

How does a philosopher earn his keep? Most of them don't. Not to worry, though. They are usually self-sufficient.

What does a philosopher serve? He opens up your mind to diverse angles, angles which you would not even think of exploring in the first place, but you have to be vigilant. Many of those angles are blind corners and dead-ends, and you only have yourself to blame if you are caught in the deep end and unable to extricate.

Would you like to become one? Sorry, but mostly you don't have a choice. Some says it is in your genes. Would I like to become one? Thanks but no thanks, if I may. Why? I have more important concerns in this world.

What characterizes a "philosopher" is what characterizes a "non-philosopher": flesh, bones, fat, tendons, muscles etc. An extraordinary configuration of materiality that enables "life" temporarily just to disintegrate again. One part of the aggregate of materiality has evolved extraordinary computational capacities to enable survival but in the organism of a "philosopher" these capacities don't naturally restrain themselves to focus on what is necessary but lead themselves astray through their own fabrications to engage in the unnecessary and fictitious.

[Wizard22]

I agree with your connection to Philosophy and diversive, seemingly absurd angles of thinking and thought.

Philosophers tend to have a perspective far 'outside' what is normal, which can be exceptionally good, or exceptionally bad.

[gad-fly]

What characterizes a "philosopher" is what characterizes a "non-philosopher": flesh, bones, fat, tendons, muscles etc.

It appears you have mixed up character with physical composition.

[Sunday66]

What characterizes a "philosopher" is what characterizes a "non-philosopher": flesh, bones, fat, tendons, muscles etc.

It appears you have mixed up character with physical composition.

And you're just mixed up. If you don't like philosophy, go to a forum to talk about what you do like.

[stevie]

What characterizes a "philosopher" is what characterizes a "non-philosopher": flesh, bones, fat, tendons, muscles etc.

It appears you have mixed up character with physical composition.

There is no character other than materiality.

[stevie]

What characterizes a "philosopher" is what characterizes a "non-philosopher": flesh, bones, fat, tendons, muscles etc.

It appears you have mixed up character with physical composition.

And you're just mixed up. If you don't like philosophy, go to a forum to talk about what you do like.

I like philosophizing about philosophy and "philosophers". "philosophizing" being philosophy this is the right place for me, isn't it?

[gad-fly]

What characterizes a "philosopher" is what characterizes a "non-philosopher": flesh, bones, fat, tendons, muscles etc.

It appears you have mixed up character with physical composition.

There is no character other than materiality.

"A philosopher is characterized by his propensity to philosophize. Conversely, he who philosophizes is not necessarily a philosopher,"

I would say you have the character to philosophize, though you may or may not be a philosopher. Correct?

Whether you are liked or not is another issue.

[stevie]

What characterizes a "philosopher" is what characterizes a "non-philosopher": flesh, bones, fat, tendons, muscles etc.

It appears you have mixed up character with physical composition.

There is no character other than materiality.

"A philosopher is characterized by his propensity to philosophize. Conversely, he who philosophizes is not necessarily a philosopher,"

I would say you have the character to philosophize, though you may or may not be a philosopher. Correct?

The brain can process written signs upon seeing and produce phenomena that make fingers type signs as response. That's it. "philosophize" or "being philosopher" are just unnecessary fabrications (of the linguistically conditioned brain) on top of this.

[gad-fly]

To philosophize is hard work. A philosopher is not a mental sloth. It is in his character to face the mental challenge. If not, he is not qualified to be so called.

As you can find out, he is a hard nut crack, since he does not give up easily. He may crack you instead.

[stevie]

To philosophize is hard work. A philosopher is not a mental sloth. It is in his character to face the mental challenge. If not, he is not qualified to be so called.

As you can find out, he is a hard nut crack, since he does not give up easily. He may crack you instead.

An aggregate of material constituents is nothing than that. But the self is a great artifice of human brain without which there would not arise thoughts.

[gad-fly]

Creativity of idea is what distinguishes philosopher and potential philosopher (called P and PP in short here). When caught in the curve of a tunnel, with no light from either end, both P and PP are prone to dart forward or backward, but not stopping to take a break. In this respect, they are pro-active. If you are alone with them in the tunnel, what would you think and do? You may take them as pilots to follow, or you may say: I don't necessarily agree with you at this point in time which is different from the last, or I would respect you by listening silently. but please don't blame me.