Philosophy is dead, or, my Jediism is what you need to believe, or else.

Arisaig wrote:

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: What is the diffrence between hypothetical statements and philosophy? Is there a diffrence?

Yes.

"Man, I wonder what I would do if I had infinite money?" A hypothetical statement that isn't philosophy.

One could make it philosophical by discussing whether or not you had a moral imperative to use the money to benefit others.

I wasn't going to even acknowledge this thread but I rather like this particular derailment, hypothetical vs philosophical.

Some people see philosophy and hypothetical as the same

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: Some people see philosophy and hypothetical as the same

Okay, but did you read the initial post? This isn't about philosophy, hypothetical questions, or whatnot.

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote:
Conflict in jedi ism comes when Greed enters. Conflict comes when greed enters period.

Kyrin wrote:
I'm not sure I would agree with you on this point. Could you please provide more detail and expand your opinions for this?

For example how do you equate conflict over necessary resources as being sourced from greed? How about philosophical or religious conflict? Christians and Muslims have killed each other for millennia but what does that have to do with greed? What about political ideologies? Republicans and democrats have radically different viewpoints in how a nation should be run that best benefits the people. How is this driven by greed?

Why is there conflict on this very board? I don't see how greed is a source of that?

What if there is no right or wrong in the conflict? That is my question? Two men in the desert, both dying of thirst. One glass of water will sustain them until they reach sanctuary. Both men come upon that glass of water. Whoever posses it will live, the other will die. To share it means death for both. This is not a conflict of greed but of survival.
How do you justify this as a conflict of greed?

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote:
These two men you speak of do not exist.

I started this thread because I was told I was derailing other threads so I brought the conversation here. I am not quitting either lol. This thread was designed to refocus a few points, the first of which is above. I wanted opinions on this scenario and one other that I may post later in this thread.

Is all conflict generated by greed? I asked that and built a scenario to help depict my opinion that it is not. However I was just dismissed from the conversation by Carlos saying the men dont even exist. Well duh, I know that! So I open this up to others to get further input.

Could you please provide the quote where someone said that philosophy is dead? I'm curious.

Proteus wrote: Could you please provide the quote where someone said that philosophy is dead? I'm curious.

I don't think anyone said it outright, but offhandedly. The quote provided before your post shows a philosophical question being posed, instantly to be shot down as "these people do not exist".

EDIT: In essence, they kill room for philosophy because they can't wrap their heads around the idea that we may need to talk about fake scenarios in order to discuss something.

At Arisaig...Hypotheticals come from a place of fear....a place of worry....so what is the forward motion to be obtained in discussing hypothetical situations that do not exist?

Athena_Undomiel wrote: Philosophy is not dead (you are still able to think for yourself, society has not taken that from us) but the situations and events that you are attempting to discuss are the product of an anxious and worried mind.
Hypotheticals exist in the anxiety inducing quicksand pit that is, what I refer to as, the "What-ifs".
As one with fairly severe anxiety myself, I can completely relate to this land of hypothetical situations. And I too have attempted to rationalize my own fears and worries as a source of my "philosophy" for living. (but are we really?)
Our amygdala (feel free to look it up if you wish) along side our own Ego produces these wildly imaginative, yet seemingly realistic situations in our mind that we occupy our time with under the delusion that "well, IF this does happen, I'll be prepared to deal with it."
This constant barrage of intrusive thoughts and worry only keep you trapped within the well fortified "safety" of your mind. It feels as though our active grasp of the actual fears and things to worry about in our world is a philosophy to live by- if you take a step back, you may find that too much of your time is spent in this "land of hypotheticals".
Look around you, actually around you- look at the NOW, you may be amazed at what is happening beyond the quicksand...and you aren't really trapped there.
What-ifs exist to keep us aware in the need of a fight or flight response---but to try to live in a world where that is primary voice in the mind is not only fearful and anxiety ridden...it's exhausting. (I know, I still get stuck there sometimes).

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

ren wrote:

I just don't find this acceptable behaviour.

I guess it's not for everyone. Goodbye and good luck!

So you condone, even embrace this elitism? Good to know, not like I didn't already from you but nice to have it spelled out so clearly. Thanks.

When someone complains that others do not espouse their philosophical views or opinions and that someone doesn't find that to be acceptable behaviour, I tell the someone 'Goodbye and good luck!' because I'm super-nice like that.

ren wrote:

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

ren wrote:

I just don't find this acceptable behaviour.

I guess it's not for everyone. Goodbye and good luck!

So you condone, even embrace this elitism? Good to know, not like I didn't already from you but nice to have it spelled out so clearly. Thanks.

When someone complains that others do not espouse their philosophical views or opinions and that someone doesn't find that to be acceptable behaviour, I tell the someone 'Goodbye and good luck!' because I'm super-nice like that.

Yet again another quick reminder to read the thread. Practise good intelligence.

Arisaig wrote:

Proteus wrote: Could you please provide the quote where someone said that philosophy is dead? I'm curious.

I don't think anyone said it outright, but offhandedly. The quote provided before your post shows a philosophical question being posed, instantly to be shot down as "these people do not exist".

EDIT: In essence, they kill room for philosophy because they can't wrap their heads around the idea that we may need to talk about fake scenarios in order to discuss something.

I think this is further example of the inherent fear that causes conflict in these threads...someone interpreted a comment as a slap in the face, but that's not what it was at all. The same thing that makes Jediism work is what causes conflict among those not able to see past it....it is all open to interpretation.