Clipmarks | Aribeth's Philosophy collection

Complete Works - Plato

Tue, 16 Sep 2008 15:49:56 GMT

clipped by: skwirlinator

Complete Works

Plato

Translated by Benjamin Jowett

Lesser Hippias
Greater Hippias
Ion
Protagoras
Apology
Crito
Alcibiades
Charmides
Laches
Lysis
Euthyphro
Gorgias
Menexenus
Meno
Euthydemus
Cratylus
Symposium
Phaedo
Republic
Phaedrus
Theaetetus
Parmenides
Sophist
Statesman
Timaeus
Critias
Philebus
Laws

Epinomis

Letters
Alcibiades II
Hipparchus
Lovers
Theages
Cleitophon
Minos

Tags: plato, as translated, works, literature

Why the World Still Needs Philosophy

Sat, 02 Aug 2008 18:35:21 GMT

clipped by: wildcat

Clip Source: www.oycf.org

This new century has the potential to be either the worst or the best of times for humanity. The worst of times because there is no end in sight to the struggle between a dehumanizing global economy and the irrational forces (sexism, racism, and superstition) threatened by its hegemony. Unlike any other time in history, ours has sufficient stupidity, power and hatred to destroy the conditions for the possibility of life on this planet before they may be preserved anywhere else; the destructive powers at our disposal far exceed our present capacity to express love or altruism. Yet, it could very easily be the best of times because we finally have technological resources sufficient to provide a good life for the entire
population of the earth.

While the desires of human beings are at least potentially finite, most of us, with varying degrees of comprehension, allow our lives to run by insatiable institutions

artificial entities have no motive other than profit and unlimited accumulation

Tags: perspectives

Eternalism, Nihilism: new forms, old superstition

Tue, 06 May 2008 09:47:03 GMT

clipped by: abailart
clipper's remarks: <<<Throughout the Buddha's long period of teaching the Dhamma to His followers, He actively discouraged speculative arguments. During the 5th century B.C. India was a veritable hive of intellectual activity where scholars, yogis, philosophers, kings and even ordinary householders were constantly engaged in the philosophical arguments pertaining to human existence. Some of these were either ridiculously trivial or totally irrelevant. Some people wasted valuable time arguing at great length about all manner of subjects. They were far more concerned about proving their powers in mental gymnastics than seeking genuine solutions to the problems that beset humanity.>>>

Clip Source: zencomp.com

To develop Right View or Perfect View, we must first be aware of two views which are considered imperfect or wrong.

The first view is eternalism. This doctrine or belief is concerned with eternal life or with eternal things. Before the Buddha's time, it was taught that there is an abiding entity which could exist forever, and that man can live the eternal life by preserving the eternal soul in order to be in union with Supreme Being. In Buddhism, this teaching is called sassata ditthi ----the view of eternalists. Such views still exist even in the modern world owing to man's craving for eternity.

The second false view is nihilism or the view held by the nihilists who claim that there is no life after death.

The teaching of kamma is enough to prove that the Buddha did not teach annihilation after death; Buddhism accepts 'survival' not in the sense of an eternal soul, but in the sense of a renewed becoming.

Tags: eternalism, nihilism, buddhism

Wonderful essay on God/Science/Universe "dilemma"

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 16:50:07 GMT

clipped by: papananook
clipper's remarks: Read the whole thing please. I love this essay! waiting for a reply from Stwish on the author....

Clip Source: stwish.livejournal.com

Can one believe simultaneously in God and the Big Bang ?

"Why, sometimes I've believed as many as

six impossible things before breakfast." The White Queen

One can, at least one one, myself, can. I can believe it in several different ways, depending on the weather. It all depends on definitions.

If God was constrained by Physical Reality, what Jefferson called Natural Law, and if the Mathematics are correct, then God must have used the mechanism of the Big Bang to create any universes He so desired. It's all a matter of definition. A matter of faith. Is the concept "God" greater than mathematics, included in mathematics, outside of mathematics entirely, or subordinate to mathematics ?

Experience proves, sadly, that a person cannot even comprehend any other person completely. You might be chained to the same oar with another person for twenty years and they would still have the capacity to totally astound you. One can even astound one's self, given half a chance and a following wind.

Neurophysiology and Buddhism

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 08:09:50 GMT

clipped by: abailart
clipper's remarks: <<<It is undeniable, however, that the false reification of that which we identify spuriously as 'self' — now acquiring the weighty imprimatur of modern science — has devastating implications for all brands of Theism.

Buddhism alone not merely encompasses this late-revealed truism, it makes it the basis of a new moral order that sees the annihilation of the self as the inelutable first step in our mastery of the existential predicament that doggedly besets us in this sorry world. A few concluding words — there remains a metaphysical (and theological) hiatus in dealing with 'being' without a reference to that other great existential puzzle — the transformative aspect of life that is generally subsumed under the title 'becoming'.>>>

Clip Source: lankaguardian.blogspot.com

The physical basis of the mind — the corporeal self — is a collection of dynamic units massively parallel in operation yet cross-linked and capable of a momentary holistic performance.

It would take us too far into the technicalities of neurophysiology to deepen our understanding of this vastly-complex neuronal system, but the message is clear — what is called the ‘self or ‘ego’ has no enduring epistemic basis. Indeed, about 99% of the work of the brain is unconscious or robotic. The interludes of awareness have a ‘personalised’ aspect that is mistaken for a permanent (and commanding) entity called the self.

extraordinary reduction of neurophysiological doctrine to tally with fundamental Buddhist thinking on these matters

world-renowned expert in these fields — Professor Francisco Varela — has declared himself a Buddhist and has made it his mission to effect a grand synthesis between the sophisticated formulations of neuroscience and the ancient truths of Buddhist psychology.

Tags: anatta, neurophysiology, buddhism

The Meaningless of Meaning

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:43:21 GMT

clipped by: abailart
clipper's remarks: <<<To Nabokov, skimming the Present without sinking into the Past is a miracle that befits only the most experienced: "Otherwise the inexperienced miracle-worker will find himself no longer walking on water but descending upright among staring fish" (if I may add) under the weight of past associations.>>>

Thus do we think we have thought and felt and experience the One, the Abyss, the Edge, the Love.... yet the graceful lightness of being is elusive and we are weighed down always, especially 'Now' (oh, its 'Power'!) by the depreciating luggage of our conceptual memories and ossified identities.

Clip Source: blogs.psychologytoday.com

Meaning is a process of filling in the blanks of the mind… with words… that trigger other words… that trigger more words… As we grow and acquire language, we, in essence, acquire a baggage of associations that weighs us down as we try to skate the thin ice of presence.

Nabokov, in Transparent Things, writes: “When we concentrate on a material object <…> the very act of attention may lead to our involuntary sinking into the history of that object. Novices must learn to skim over matter if they want to stay at the exact level of the moment.”

“A thin veneer of immediate reality is spread over natural and artificial matter, and whoever wishes to remain in the now, with the now, on the now, should please not break its tension film.”

Meaning is an artifact of the Past, not the actual fact of the Present.

instead of seeing reality as it is, we see a “so-called” reality

Language constructs perception: first, the word, then, the perceived reality.

Tags: nabokov

Do we want a truly liberal society?

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:40:36 GMT

clipped by: wildcat
clipper's remarks: A liberal society embraces pluralism, in the sense that it does not seek to impose any one vision of what it means to be virtuous or to lead a good life. Within such a society, approval is commonly expressed for John Stuart Mill’s view that “experiments in living” should not be merely tolerated, but actually welcomed and celebrated (Mill 1974: 120).

As Max Charlesworth writes, “In a liberal society personal autonomy, the right to choose one’s own way of life for oneself, is the supreme value.” He adds that this includes what he calls ethical pluralism: members of the society are free to hold a wide range of moral, religious, and non-religious positions, with no core values or public morality that it is the law’s business to enforce (Charlesworth 1993: 1). Accordingly, a liberal society makes a sharp distinction between the sphere of personal moral views and that of the law; no one can use the law to impose their beliefs on others (16-20).

Clip Source: ieet.org

The goal of a liberal society puts obligations on its citizens, that we practice reasonableness and openness to ideas, that we do not just tolerate one another but support one another to our fullest flourishing. A liberal society is not neutral about values like disease and health, sloth and effort, deceit and integrity, cowardice and courage. There are excellences that citizens of a liberal society must promote to survive.

Commentators on new biomedical technology often appear to believe that we are faced with Frankensteinian possibilities that cry out for a regulatory response. This, however, is getting things exactly back to front. On the contrary, the problem that we currently face is that widespread fear of new technologies has created an atmosphere in which liberal tolerance is under challenge. In the field of bioethics, what we need right now is a truly liberal response.

identify genuine dangers and concerns, but deal with them strictly in accordance with liberal values

Tags: liberal society, bioethics

Stages of Life & Philosophy

Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:43:40 GMT

clipped by: Sheroug

Clip Source: www.alionline.net

stages of life

806. Every stage of life corresponds to a certain philosophy. A child appears as a realist; for it is as certain of the existence of pears and apples as it is of its own being. A young man, caught up in the storm of his inner passions, has to pay attention to himself, look and feel ahead; he is transformed into an idealist. A grown man, on the other hand, has every reason to be a sceptic; he is well advised to doubt whether the means he has chosen to achieve his purpose can really be right. Before action and in the course of action he has every reason to keep his mind flexible so that he will not have to grieve later on about a wrong choice. An old man, however, will always avow mysticism. He sees that so much seems to depend on chance: unreason succeeds, reason fails, fortune and misfortune unexpectedly come to the same thing in the end; this is how things are, how they were, and old age comes to rest in him who is, who was and ever will be.

Goethe, Maxims and Reflections

intellectual

Tue, 15 Apr 2008 21:57:32 GMT

clipped by: zizzy
clipper's remarks: More is better, when it comes to wealth and intelligence.

Better is better, when it comes to looks and intellect.

It's always OK to be intelligent.

Being an intellectual is another matter.

Clip Source: www.niquette.com

intellectual n. One who exercises intellect, the doctrine that knowledge is the product of pure reason; rationalism rather than emotionalism.

An intellectual is a man who takes more words than necessary to tell more than he knows.

-- Dwight D. Eisenhower

Not me, Ike. I don't take more words than necessary to tell more than I know. Here's what I know:

One might speak of an intelligent dog but never an intellectual one.

Intelligence implies the ability to cope with novel situations and new problems, to apply what is learned from experience, and to use the power of reasoning and inference effectively as a guide to behavior.

Intellect extends beyond learning and reasoning to a capacity for reflection and understanding. Intellectuals enjoy the ability to think abstractly.

Intelligence acquires facts then manipulates knowledge.

Intellect observes relationships then contemplates ideas.

A curious candlepower -- from dim to bright to brilliant -- calibrates intelligence.

Not so with intellect.

The Courage to Be

Sat, 12 Apr 2008 16:38:47 GMT

clipped by: abailart
clipper's remarks: Useful overview of Tillich's The Courage to Be, supported by general account of existential approaches to anxiety of non-being, including Kierkegaard and Heidegger.

Clip Source: www.escapefromwatchtower.com

Security is so seductive, and insecurity is so frightening. But security is always false, and insecurity is always real. No religion can make anyone secure, though it, like the drugs on which our society is so dependent, can give the illusion of security. True religion enables one to grasp life with the radical insecurity and to live it with courage. It does not aid us in the pretense that our insecurities have been taken away

"The courage to be is the ethical act in which man affirms his own being in spite of those elements of his existence which conflict with his essential self-affirmation . . it is the affirmation of one's essential nature, one's inner aim or entelechy (vital force, realization), but it is an affirmation which has in itself the character of "in spite of."

"The courage to be in all its forms has, by itself, revelatory character. it shows the nature of being, it shows that the self-affirmation of being is an affirmation that overcomes negation."

TILLICH

The Courage to Be

Tags: tillich, courage to be, anxiety, angst

Epistemology

Wed, 09 Apr 2008 18:37:16 GMT

clipped by: carrerinyes

Clip Source: www.philosophyclass.com

EPISTEMOLOGY

Epistemology is the study of the valid forms of knowledge. It comes from the Greek "episteme" which means knowledge. It is sometimes called "theory of knowledge". It must be noted that epistemology as a distinct branch of philosophy is of recent origin. Usually Descartes is considered the first philosopher to seriously work in epistemology. The validity of knowledge was more or less taken for granted by previous philosophers. It was only when Descartes began to systematically doubt the veracity of knowledge that problems of knowledge became apparent.

The problems considered in epistemology are:

Is genuine knowledge attainable at all? Is the skeptic right?
What are the limits of knowledge?
From what faculties of the mind does knowledge originate?
Which method should be used to obtain valid knowledge?
How do you justify a priori statements?
Where is the boundary between the subjective and objective factors?
What is the nature of truth?

SKEPTICISM

RATIONALISM

EMPIRICISM

KANT

The Slow Arrow of Beauty

Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:19:56 GMT

clipped by: Sheroug

Clip Source: www.alionline.net

149
The slow arrow of beauty. - The noblest kind of beauty is not that which suddenly transports us, which makes a violent and intoxicating assault upon us (such beauty can easily excite disgust), but that which slowly infiltrates us, which we bear away with us almost without noticing and encounter again in dreams, but which finally, after having for long lain modestly in our heart, takes total possession of us, filling our eyes with tears and our heart with longing. - What is it we long for at the sight of beauty? To be beautiful ourself: we imagine we would be very happy if we were beautiful. - But that is an error.

--Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human

Tags: nietzsche, beauty

To be Interesting and Interested Let Go of Mind

Sun, 06 Apr 2008 16:16:19 GMT

clipped by: abailart
clipper's remarks: <<<The practice of mindfulness – in its psychologically Buddhist sense – has been described as a kind of detachment, dis-identification, i.e. dis-interest from one’s own thoughts, which, as Snelling points out in his “Buddhist Handbook,” are “not us” (3).

Notice Snelling's italics: our thougths are "not us." This Buddhist proposition that we are not our thoughts would imply that any real communication beetwen us (and not between our respective fleeting states of mind) would have to be non-verbal...

So, then, it would seem that in order for us to show inter-est in others’ thoughts, for us to inter-exist, we need to lose interest in our own thoughts. To co-exist, it seems, we need to never mind our own minds. With no thoughts to stand in the way of understanding, there is nothing between us, there are no gaps of misunderstanding to bridge…>>>

Clip Source: blogs.psychologytoday.com

Did you know that the semantics of the word “interest” have to do with inter-existence (“inter” – between, “est” – to be)? The nineteenth century philosopher and theologian Soren Kierkegaard noted that the word “inter-est” “expresses the fact that we are so intimately involved in the objective world that we cannot be content to regard truth objectively, i.e. disinterestedly” (1).

While Kierkegaard here seemed to be concerned with the notions of truth and objectivity, this quotation (I stumbled upon in Rollo May’s “Meaning of Anxiety”), prompted a realization that being mindfully interested in each other is nothing less than meeting in between. Mindful presence is a co-existence in the space of shared subjectivity, without the usual preoccupations with the truth…

Tags: mind, kierkegaard, inter-est, communication

He Could Not Forgive, Simply Because He Forgot

Thu, 03 Apr 2008 22:25:38 GMT

clipped by: Sheroug

Clip Source: www.alionline.net

he could not forgive, simply because he - forgot

To be unable to take his enemies, his misfortunes, and even his misdeeds seriously for long - that is the sign of strong, rounded natures with a superabundance of a power which is flexible, formative, healing and can make one forget (a good example from the modern world is Mirabeau, who had no recall of the insults and slights directed at him and who could not forgive, simply because he - forgot.) A man like this shakes from him, with one shrug, many worms which would have burrowed into another man; actual 'love for your enemies' is also possible here and here alone - assuming it is possible at all on earth.

--Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morality

Tags: nietzsche, forgivness

Philosophy Games

Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:36:47 GMT

clipped by: carrerinyes

Clip Source: mmagee.com

test your philosophical acumen by checking out these philosophy games, quizzes, puzzles, and trivia (each opens in a new browser window):

battleground God
morality play
shakespeare vs. britney spears
strange new world
the philosophical health check
staying alive
so you think you're logical?
dealing with science
philosophy trivia and quizzes
philosophy aptitude test
philosophy crossword (requires adobe acrobat reader)