What’s Your Philosophy of Life?

I've never actually spent the time needed to summarize my thoughts on a philosophy for life. To keep things simple, I have narrowed it down to two thoughts which are somewhat, but not completely, unrelated:

There is no self.

There is only now.
 
ZenMode said:
scientifically, or maybe horologically, speaking yes. As a matter of life philosophy, and presumably a goal of living a happy life, there's no need to allow either to impact you.
Click to expand...

I need to eat lunch tomorrow. I better buy some food tonight. I don't see how "the now" helps this situation.
 
BidenPresident said:
I need to eat lunch tomorrow. I better buy some food tonight. I don't see how "the now" helps this situation.
Click to expand...

The reference to now is about managing negative feelings like anger and stress, not growing your hair out, buying VW bus and living as though there is no tomorrow.

When something happened that generated the thought that made you mad is, like every thought you've ever had, it's transient. It comes and then goes. In order to stay mad, we allow thoughts about XXXX to exist in consciousness and make/keep us mad. We've all been mad about something and had a distraction suddenly change our mood. A phone call, something funny on TV, a knock at the door, etc. So, when I say "there is only now" it means controlling the thoughts about a past event that made you mad, future event that causes you stress, etc so you don't stay in that negative state of mind.
 
BidenPresident said:
I see, you see philosophy of life as ethics.
Click to expand...

Being ethical is part of a positive philosophy of life.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/
Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued that the supreme principle of morality is a principle of practical rationality that he dubbed the “Categorical Imperative” (CI). Kant characterized the CI as an objective, rationally necessary and unconditional principle that we must follow despite any natural desires we may have to the contrary.
Click to expand...

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/
Virtue ethics is currently one of three major approaches in normative ethics. It may, initially, be identified as the one that emphasizes the virtues, or moral character, in contrast to the approach that emphasizes duties or rules (deontology) or that emphasizes the consequences of actions (consequentialism). Suppose it is obvious that someone in need should be helped. A utilitarian will point to the fact that the consequences of doing so will maximize well-being, a deontologist to the fact that, in doing so the agent will be acting in accordance with a moral rule such as “Do unto others as you would be done by” and a virtue ethicist to the fact that helping the person would be charitable or benevolent.
Click to expand...
 
ZenMode said:
The reference to now is about managing negative feelings, like anger and stress, not growing your hair out, buying VW bus and living as though there is no tomorrow.

When something happenes that generated the thought that made you mad it, like every thought you've ever had, is transient. It comes and then goes. In order to stay mad, we allow thoughts about XXXX to reappear in consciousness and make/keep us mad. We've all been mad about something and had a distraction suddenly change our mood: A phone call, something funny on TV, a knock at the door, etc. So, when I say "there is only now" it means controlling the thoughts about a past event that made you mad, future event that causes you stress, etc so you don't stay in that negative state of mind.
Click to expand...

I really should have proof read that post.
 
BidenPresident said:
What my students get when they turn up to PHIL 101, on the other hand, is a crash course in analytic philosophy, the particularly techy strain of the discipline that came to dominate English-speaking university departments in the twentieth century. A central feature of analytic philosophy is its small-scale, piecemeal method of approaching big questions.

A second feature of analytic philosophy is an attitude. The standard philosophy professor these days is a hardheaded secular rationalist.

But I find myself wondering if you can really pull that division-of-labor move with philosophy, even if you can with, say, economics or physics. Though we call philosophy the love of truth, what it really seeks is understanding, which requires grasping the relationships between things and organizing them into an intelligible whole. It’s no longer clear to me that you can do this adequately if you restrict your attention to one tiny domain at a time.

https://thepointmag.com/examined-life/whats-your-philosophy-of-life/
Click to expand...

Wait?
You are claiming to be a teacher?

Yet, more than any other member I can think of?
Refuse to debate anyone, rationally.
And simply throw simplistic, ad hominem's at those who disagree with you to ANY, substantive degree?

Shit...you must be one, HORRIBLE teacher.


EDIT...I just saw that you were just quoting.
Thank GOODNESS for your potential students.

BTW - haven't you ever heard of quotation marks?
 
Last edited:
McRocket said:
Wait?
You are claiming to be a teacher?

Yet, more than any other member I can think of?
Refuse to debate anyone, rationally.
And simply throw simplistic, ad hominem's at those who disagree with you to ANY, substantive degree?

Shit...you must be one, HORRIBLE teacher.
Click to expand...

Read more slowly and think, son. She's probably about your age and doesn't know how to avoid looking like the author of the article. If you clicked the link, you'd see that she simply cut'n'pasted it.

Those who graduated from college know how to properly cite an article without giving the appearance of plagiarism. Dropouts, not so much.
 
Philosophy?
The science of wasting the most time possible on things that do nothing substantive for humanity.

Show me a philosophy major?
And I will show you a condescending prick with few social skills, even fewer friends and barely a clue what the world is actually like.


Correction.

I was NOT referring to 'natural philosophy'.

Like the study of astronomy, medicine, physics et al.
Those are clearly of a practical nature.
And are extremely valuable.

I realize they are technically part of the philosophical field.
But I do not think of them as 'philosophies'.


I was referring STRICTLY to social sciences such as psychology, sociology, linguistics, and economics.
Those - to me - are little more than theoretical blather.
Theory, theory and more theory.

For example, our economy would be in FAR better shape were it not for the egomaniacs who pedal 'philosophical economics'.
BTW - The Fed is FULL of those.

And here is what it got them:

https://cdbanks.org/news/fed-misread-crisis-2008-records-show
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fed-missed-the-housing-bust/

And please do not pretend most of you know what I am referring to AND in what context?
I have read many of your macroeconomic posts on this site.
90+% of you do not (appear) to truly, understand macroeconomics...AT ALL.
And worse - you apparently think you do.


I apologize for my original mistake.
 
Last edited:
McRocket said:
Philosophy?
The science of wasting the most time possible on things that do nothing substantive for humanity.

Show me a philosophy major?
And I will show you a condescending prick with few social skills, even fewer friends and barely a clue what the world is actually like.
Click to expand...
You and Zenmode should hook up. :thup:

So you were a philosophy major in college? What do you do now?

TBH, I changed majors a few times. The second to last was, indeed, philosophy.
 
McRocket said:
Wait?
You are claiming to be a teacher?

Yet, more than any other member I can think of?
Refuse to debate anyone, rationally.
And simply throw simplistic, ad hominem's at those who disagree with you to ANY, substantive degree?

Shit...you must be one, HORRIBLE teacher.


EDIT...I just saw that you were just quoting.
Thank GOODNESS for your potential students.

BTW - haven't you ever heard of quotation marks?
Click to expand...

You are a dumb motherfucker.
 
BidenPresident said:
McRocket said:
Wait?
You are claiming to be a teacher?

Yet, more than any other member I can think of?
Refuse to debate anyone, rationally.
And simply throw simplistic, ad hominem's at those who disagree with you to ANY, substantive degree?

Shit...you must be one, HORRIBLE teacher.
Click to expand...
You are a dumb motherfucker.
Click to expand...

You two should hook up. :thup:

6te8hz.jpg


If you include Zenmode, you could make it a threesome. :)
 
McRocket said:
Philosophy?
The science of wasting the most time possible on things that do nothing substantive for humanity.

Show me a philosophy major?
And I will show you a condescending prick with few social skills, even fewer friends and barely a clue what the world is actually like.
Click to expand...

You are one dumb motherfucking asshole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top