As the topic indicates... What is the philosophy, quote, saying etc... that you base you life mostly on and use basicly every day in your life with yourself and your surroundings?
I mainly follow the quote : "To be or not to be? That is not the question! To BE! But to be what?" it kind of makes me think about every choice i make in my life and every path i choose to take with myself and my surrounding.

"Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakes" -Carl Jung

Though, that is just one of many in which I can find some relevance; some reflection.

An interesting idea for a thread, Mr. Crematory.

I'm an individualist. I believe in everyone's right to choose, but I also believe in the function of the state to make sure everyone has that right. I believe in the Nietzschean idea that we are our own Gods. And as a follower of the Hippocratic creed I believe in the sanctity of life.

@Daibh: Thats a very nice quote which i believe is playing an important role in my life without noticing! I really liked that quote (by the way thanks for the complement )

@ Ur-Nammu well you have quite a nice basis, yet i disagree with you on the Nietzschean belief that we are our own gods and we master ourselves. But as Voltaire said "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it" I think you also believe in this statement if im not mistaken

@CrematorY, of course, I would be a hypocrite not to

And I don't believe that we master ourselves wholly, as biological entities, but I believe that we control our own destinies and the spirit, the cognitive entity that we are, that intertwines with our biological selves. Serfdom is never positive, whether it is imposed upon one by the government, by an illusive idea of fate, or by a supernatural puppetmaster.

These are, in simplified form, the ideologies I rest my moral foundations upon.

I take the Thrasymachus - Machiavelli - Nietzsche approach to philosophy. They all argue that moral values are socially constructed and are thus the reflections of interest of particular communities. I believe that altruism cannot exist, and, if I would ever run for president, I would follow Machiavelli's advice of choosing the least worst.

Other than that, I think that everyone at some point in their life has to undergo what Foucalt terms a "limit experience" - that is, an event which pushes you outside of your comfort zone and forces you to readjust and rethink how you view the world. I think it's necessary so that you don't end up living under the same set of beliefs that you had when you were an adolescent.

Machiavelli?
Nietzsche ?

Ah -as interesting as the above two names are; as are others like them, of that ilk: I can't help but wonder if this is the troubled-teens approach to a philosphical outlook? I mean. There is a lot of theory here; much for the wondering mind to get involved with. But where is the practice? --In a society where it is just so uncool for teens to practice or preach love and undertanding (the age of Slipknot, not Silicon) the likes of Machiavelli and Nietzche seem to be really going down a treat.

Please do remember the s in Nietzsche if you are going to refer to him as a foundation of your beliefs

And Daibh, Nietzsche is among the least understood philosophers of our age. He never said that love and understanding are ill, on the contrary.

Written by Guest on 17.06.2006 at 19:25

And Daibh, Nietzsche is among the least understood philosophers of our age. He never said that love and understanding are ill, on the contrary.

I have read Nietzsche since the dawn of my interest in philosophy. I am more than aware of how his words have been deliberatley misunderstood and abused. --It is this misconstruing of his outlook, to which I refered above.

Sorry if I did not make myself clear.

well one thing is that im compeltely against Machiavelli's philosophy which he mentions in his book "The Prince" and i cant personally agree with a person who grants haphazard advices such as "It is not neccesary for a prince to have good qualities, but it is neccesary to seem to have them", and i do not agree with the belief of the end justifies the mean, since it shows moral decadence and deterioration if im not mistaken...

"Nothing is sacred"

I follow this principle nearly every day. You see, society has this tendency that the world needs to be sparkly and nice, and that it needs to be sugar-coated as to not offend large amounts of people. I find society's attempts at living in a perfect fantasy world where nothing scary happens to be futile. They try to create the illusion that nothing bad will ever happen to their life that if something horrifying were to actually happen, they would break down uncontrollably, when they realize that their happiness had been compromised. Remember 9/11? That event showed that society cannot live in denile forever.

Another example of this principle would have to be applied to Chuck Norris, that man that many people on the internet seem to blindly worship. Why did I choose this as an example? You see, those people who worship Chuck Norris believe that the man has god-like powers, for example "His tears can cure any disease, but he never cries". Considering they see him as being the equivalent to god, how would those people react when Chuck Norris dies? As we all know, death is inevitable and the great equalizer of the human spirit. With this in mind, in what way would the worshippers react to this situation? Would they emotionally break down for days?

To sum things up, the point I am trying to get across is that nothing in this universe can be held as sacred. If someone does hold something as sacred, they will only be greeted by despair when their sacred idol is destroyed in some way.

The philosophy I base my life on has several elements in it. To begin with I believe that change comes from within. If I want to change the world I need to start from within. Combined with this I believe that being positive will attract more positive things towards me.

I am also greatly inspired by two quotes by the late Bruce Lee "Absorb what is useful, reject what is not, and add what makes you" as well as "Life's battles don't always go to the stronger or faster man but sooner or later the man who wins is the man who thinks he can".

I look at action and consequence, doing more of those things that will make me feel good, and also create a good atmosphere for the people around me.

Furthermore I believe that we are our own God, that the potential of our minds is unlimited and the blocks in our minds need to be broken down for us to release that potential. I also believe that humans fear what we are capable of. We subconsciously sabotage a lot of our efforts at becoming better because we are afraid of it. We say things to ourselves such as "I can't do this, I am terrible at that" etc, instead of saying. "I can do this, I am becoming better at this every day that goes by".

Just try observing that in yourselves through a couple of days, or a week. Turn it into saying something positive, it will MOST CERTAINLY help you.

I also believe in body-mind-spirit, that especially the breath is something that interconnects all of those three facets of me.

@Insineratehymn: The Chuck Norris things are just fun exaggerations, not meant to be taken seriously. Just to give you a laugh:-)

@Insineratehymn: you are perfectly correct, nothing is sacred, but we should aim to construct a utopic world were malevolence, chaos and disorder do not exist, we must aim for a new world order, and that is what will make us overcome all these ominous works done by the blood-coated evil-surrounded human world.

@mertal: I see you believe in matrixism, that is the omnipotence and boundless capabilities of the human mind, well that exists in my belief i believe that we hold the mind of gods, but use only a proportion of it, and if we are able to breach it, we become gods ourselves. even religion says that God created man on his image... But the only question that we do not have an answer for is how? How can we breach?
Well i think i found an answer to it... you surely recognize nike's motto...(Just do it!) well yeah, Just do it! But the thing is i still cant

Written by Guest on 17.06.2006 at 21:00

I see you believe in matrixism

Could you define for me please, the term Matrixism?

I hoping that an accepted school of thought, derived solely from the movie of a similar name is not in play. I mean, here we are touching on two schools very dear to me (Gnosticism and Buddhism; the former of which I practice in full) that the forementioned movie has been profoundly influenced.

I can explain this further, if this is indeed what we are talking about.

Cheers.

well my friend that is not based on a movie as you said, and was not born a few years ago, but it dates a couple of thousand years ago, and is based on Plato's Theory Of Forms which the movie itself is based on. Matrixism is only a classical name for it after the movie. I dont think i have to explain the Theory of Forms... You know it

Written by Guest on 17.06.2006 at 21:20

well my friend that is not based on a movie as you said, and was not born a few years ago, but it dates a couple of thousand years ago, and is based on Plato's Theory Of Forms which the movie itself is based on. Matrixism is only a classical name for it after the movie. I dont think i have to explain the Theory of Forms... You know it

I do know it, you are correct.

So you are saying the term Matrixism was given to a certain school of Platonian thought, after the movie?

Something here just doesn't cut it with me. The Theory of Forms only exists within the movie, if it is twisted and viewed through severely squinted eyes.

Now, I am not an expert on the movie, but perhaps someone could tell me how the basic premises of Plato's concept fit in here:

There is the ethics; asking plainly how our kind could continue to exist as we do, if all to which we are attached, are things that are expendable, conbustable, and so easily taken from us. If all to which we dwell, our earth and our sky; both unmoving and moving all at one....how can this be? And how does the Matrix, as a movie, deal with these issues?

Well Plato believes that the world of perfection exists, and we only view a small part of the truth. Upon going out of the cave, we will be blinded at first, but then we will be able to see the sun, and experiment around with nature to later on understand its function, to undestand The Truth, and hence Awaken from the world of ignorance which we lived in when we were in the cave. The Matrix in the movie simply symbolizes the cave, and the real world symbolizes the world of perfection which we see completely, and not view only a part of its truth.
I am not up to discuss the movie, only the theory of Forms which some people combined to the movie granting it the name Matrixsism, with a difference is that Plato talks about a world of perfection, and the movie talks about a real world. I guess i should have said to mertal i see you believe in the theory of forms to avoid all this confusion.Sorry for all this fuss

Written by Guest on 17.06.2006 at 18:43

Machiavelli?
Nietzsche ?

Ah -as interesting as the above two names are; as are others like them, of that ilk: I can't help but wonder if this is the troubled-teens approach to a philosphical outlook? I mean. There is a lot of theory here; much for the wondering mind to get involved with. But where is the practice? --In a society where it is just so uncool for teens to practice or preach love and undertanding (the age of Slipknot, not Silicon) the likes of Machiavelli and Nietzsche seem to be really going down a treat.

I know a lot of my peers do tend to generalize, and perhaps I may be guilty of that sin as well, but it's certainly not the 'troubled teen' approach. I find it hard to believe that it's uncool to practice or preach love and understanding - maybe it's just because I live in NYC, but around here liberalism, multiculturalism, and relativism have all garnered massive followings. I find that in debates I'm often the odd one out, being that I don't exactly believe that a lot of this love and harmony stuff can actually exist in today's society. But you have to give teens more credit than that. And besides, if this is the age of Slipknot, and a common teenage mantra is 'you don't understand me', then wouldn't said teens be advocating understanding?

But, as long as I'm on the subject of Machiavelli, I don't swallow it hook line and sinker. There are parts I disagree with. But one part I found really interesting was in Wolin's critique of Machiavelli, where he says that Machiavelli's advice advocates what Wolin termed an 'economy of violence' - that is, that there needs to be a constant reserve or threat of violence in order to keep things going, so to speak. And not even violence in the traditional sense - to a certain extent, laws are violence, inasmuch as they carry the implicit threat of it.

I mean, that might not govern my life, but I think it certainly is relevant to today's society.

(oh, and I feel really silly for misspelling Nietzsche - I feel like a silly teenager)

oh, and @ Crematory - I thought the cave, and the shadows in it, represented the fallacy of believing in socially constructed truths, and the blinding light of the sun represented empirical truth. I always took it to be that he was arguing against relativism, and his allegory is, in part, saying that truth is absolute.

Well Conundrum what i have learned at school during my philosophy lectures which is lead by my philosophy proffessor who owns a PHD in philosophy from Cornell university is that in Plato's book "The Republic", the shadows represent a partial truth which we only see a part of and interpret on our way. I dont know if he taught me wrong you tell me...

I had many philosophies, all are chaotic and its time for one this time about work and job.

I hate it I Think people must tase and feel life, noty worlk all day, I dont need money, cars, big houses, i think better I die how I shood go work ewery day, Its not for me, so if I some day wont be here you know my parents send me a work and I take a rope

The way I understand the Simile of the Cave by Plato, is that he is suggesting there to be an absolute truth, but it is hidden from our eyes. Our world and everything in it is flawed and a shadow of it's ideal form. The people in the cave mistake the shadows as the real thing, not knowing of the ideal forms that are outside their world. Thus it represents a dualist worldview, that there is the world we dwell in, and the world of ideals, which is perfection and yet unattainable by us.

Also there's the notion of someone getting a glimpse at the truth and his comrades killing him because they don't want their perception of the world be torn apart.

But I must say I resent the naming of a school of thought after a pop-film which had some poor man's kiosk philosophy for the average American

Speaking about philosophy, since I am studying it, I have lost most of my respect towards philosophers. I don´t follow any kind of principle in my life. Although there´ s an ideal articulated by early Wittgenstein - "What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence". Although this represents the tradition of ideal language which has failed (quite miserably, to be honest) I admire the aim to find the limits of meaningful language. Todays world is polluted with words that are pointless, the texts literally swallow us. So my priniciple in a really wide sense would be minimalism. Yet there are so many exceptions that I hardly can name it a principle at all

Anyway, I usually support hostility towards big words like Love, Will to Power, Nation, Life etc.

Two previous paragraphs aren´t separate btw.

@ Kariasakis7: Well man you ought to accept the fact that you cant live life without working! Even the most luxurious people work well bill gates is worth 40 billion dollars if not more, he can retire and let his generations live in eternal luxury. yet he is still working. When you retire in your 60s, believe me you will get depressed! I know people who died from depression! Work makes you feel useful for yourself and towards society...
@ Ur-Nammu: Well, you got a point there buddy but i told you i ment about the allegory of the cave not the movie...
@ uku: cool... i want to take courses in philosophy as a minor aside with physics... And you are right today the world is polluted with words that are pointless... Eugene Ionesco talks about that in his " The Bald Soprano" When the little girl starts saying her poem... well i find it quite funny but actually it has to make us cry... And yeah about Love, Will to Power, Nation, Life etc... these are words that we should be cautious when using, and we should know their real meaning before using them, and not use them haphazardly...

@CrematorY no man in some old good Europe countries gourement play some social garenties to you, its enought for me to living, even if food be once in day, but still i know I need money, but i hate work, so my filosophy are if i cant life whit out work, better I die, its simple. death are answer to all

@Crematory, yea, I know you meant the allegory, but I just find it rather... distasteful to give such a name to the idea, and I'm not suggesting you named it

@uku, why hostility towards big words? I mean, surely, big concepts have big, tangled, nonsensical, multi-faceted and unclear definitions, but they are useful in some instances

Written by Guest on 19.06.2006 at 23:16

@uku, why hostility towards big words? I mean, surely, big concepts have big, tangled, nonsensical, multi-faceted and unclear definitions, but they are useful in some instances

Give some examples then I believe you

@uku, how else can you explain the immense overwhelming sensation of being overrun by hormones and psychological sensations, when one can just use the word "love" to encompass it. In issues that pertain to love, them being unclear as it is, an unclear a word such as that is quite right for the occasion I would say

Nation as a word is rather redundant, and mostly propagandistic. Life, as we know it, isn't as we know it, as we all know it differently. But still, life, or it's inexistence has some uses as a descriptive term for the vast array of subjects it encompasses.

Written by Guest on 20.06.2006 at 00:03

@uku, how else can you explain the immense overwhelming sensation of being overrun by hormones and psychological sensations, when one can just use the word "love" to encompass it. In issues that pertain to love, them being unclear as it is, an unclear a word such as that is quite right for the occasion I would say

Nation as a word is rather redundant, and mostly propagandistic. Life, as we know it, isn't as we know it, as we all know it differently. But still, life, or it's inexistence has some uses as a descriptive term for the vast array of subjects it encompasses.

About love I am surely satisfied when this concept is used in our everyday discourse but people usually tend to treat it like there was a separate entity or essence corresponding to that word (coughplatocough). From that attitude we get Love (or true love) which for me is quite strange. Meaning of such words lies in their use and the use isn´t strictly determined. In my opinion.
All in all, "love" is the most raped concept in todays world so I myself often step into the same bucket and feel uncomfortable using it (but that may belong to another thread).

Life seems to be also often understood as a certain essence ( "true life" or Life).

Well, I am young and ignorant, but I like to think I can claim I know how to make a piece of the pie. I have a small understanding of a very thin amount of philosophy, but it is on a plain that is very broad, and that I am very interested in traveling upon. I could name a few things, but I will start with a quote from a new favorite author of mine.

Howard Philips Lovecraft wrote in the first sentence of the first paragraph of his timeless work 'The Call of Cthulhu'; "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents." This to me, means that we can never fully understand everything presented before us, and this somehow drives me to learn as much as I can. I have tried to explain things like "How can space be endless?"; "How did it all begin?"; "Is there life after death, and if not, can I comprehend non-existence?" and so forth. I am thankful that I do not know all, because if I did, I think I would lose all sanity.

It's nothing of really philosophical significance, but something I wanted to throw in there. That is one of a few quotes I like to play upon these days. Connect that with Varg's lyric from 'Lost Wisdom'; "Other planes lie beyond the reach of normal sense and common roads, but they are no less real than what we see or touch or feel."; and I think I could go on for days.