The growth of one blesses all…an affirmation!

“The growth of one blesses all. I am committed to grow in love. All that I touch, I touch in love I would move through world consciously and creatively” – Julia Cameron Photo credit: Waftings from the Ether https://www.facebook.com/Waftings-from-the-Ether-388467361318607/?fref=photo

https://purplerays.wordpress.com/2016/02/23/the-growth-of-one-blesses-all-an-affirmation/

Advertisements

Collections of people with online papers by David Chalmers

David Chalmers not only has a big collection of philosophical jokes but also a huge collection of links to people with online philosophy papers. And by huge I mean huge. I think you can read nearly a whole life if you try to read all the papers that can be find by this list. (It […]

https://therealistturn.wordpress.com/2016/03/02/collections-of-people-with-online-papers-by-david-chalmers/

~ Always good to find a philosopher list, thanks to David Chalmers! @MmePhilosopher

Dionysian Origins

, I have not found a specific term to label Nietzsche’s alternative considerations, but he advised individuals to create themselves by experiencing pain and pleasure, allowing room for one’s own selfish concerns, and acknowledging progress to belong to evil intentions. Or, rather, asked for a redefinition/understanding of the terms “good and evil.” I think Nietzsche wants us to be honest and ask ourselves, “What do I think I want? Let us see…I’ll have to try each flavor, as I cannot rely on a universal demand to tell me I prefer lemon. I think I like chocolate better.” Here, duty would demand that lemon was the flavor and sucking a lemon tart was the moral thing to do. “Evil” urged that another flavor would not be as tart. Experience showed chocolate as personal preference. Evil encouraged change. {Imagine room full of stiff philosophers sucking on lemons, and Nietzsche stretched out with a box of Godiva. lol<>}.

Nietzsche saw the qualities of good and evil as motivating forces for humankind to determine their own path. However, the ability to improve fell on the side of evil and not good; Nietzsche said, “The strongest and most evil spirits have so far done the most to advance humanity… they forced men to pit opinion against opinion, ideal model against ideal model” (4). Real change were implemented by men of evil intent – the people who were not satisfied with current rule and used force to upend reality – while the men of good intent were attempting to keep life nice and easy. Nietzsche saw anything “new” as linked to evil because it disordered the previous good. Nietzsche said, “All refined servility clings to the categorical imperative and is the mortal enemy of those who want to deprive duty of its unconditional character…” (5). He saw duty as created obligation used as means to ensure that the average human fed the artificial system of society. He advised humanity to give up their moral high-horses and to recognize their own selfishness; Nietzsche said, “For it is selfish to consider one’s own judgement [sic] a universal law, and this selfishness is blind, petty, and simple because it shows that you haven’t yet discovered yourself or created for yourself an ideal of your very own…” (335). Selfishness is not all bad, as we have seen in previous texts this session. What matters is what one does with their selfish considerations.

The message I receive from Nietzsche is that we are all master’s of our own universes and not limited to strict morality as society understood it – individually, people are able to create themselves, and they do not need society to tell them how to do it. Dionysian pessimism was predicted for the future, in the hands of anarchists – those seized with romantic pessimism that extended their torture on the lot of humanity; Nietzsche said:

 

The desire for destruction, for change and for becoming can be the expression of an overflowing energy pregnant with the future (my term for this is, as is known, ‘Dionysian’); but it can also be the hatred of the ill-constituted, deprived, and underprivileged one who destroys and must destroy because what exists, indeed all existence, all being, outrages and provokes him (370).

 

Is this ‘Dionysian’ his term to replace morality? The becoming process was a path for unique and incomparable individuals who wanted to create their own laws as well as themselves, he said: “Sitting in moral judgement [sic] should offend our taste” (Nietzsche 335). Life was a process that required physicists to create reality.

 

Works Cited

Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Gay Science. Ed. Bernard Williams. Trans.

Josefine Nauckhoff and Adrian del Caro. Cambridge, United

Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2015.

Thank you for the picture:  http://content2.beyondretro.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/THE_DIONYSIAN_STILL_21.jpg

Faith, Reason, and Consciousness according to Herr Professor

{Peer} noted that faith and spiritualization, for Nietzsche, are separate from instinct. Let’s look for balance between faith, reason, and consciousness.

Faith:

  • in oneself – hard to come by; people spend too much time convincing their inner skeptic that the self is worth supporting; may require genius (284).
  • errors of – Nietzsche sees many truths exposed as erroneous and the weakest form of knowledge; to include: “that there are enduring things; that there are identical things, kinds of material, bodies; that a thing is what it appears to be; that our will is free; that what is good for me is also good in and for itself” (110).
  • cause and effect – Faith relies on belief, not factual evidence or empirical truth. It is an extended working of the imagination. Nietzsche noted that one’s belief would change dependent on experience; he said, “Before the effect one believes in causes different from those one believes in after the effect” (217).

Reason:

  • Nietzsche sees reason as clouded because humanity assumes too many false truths to really work out any hard-core expressions of reason.
  • e. How can one find reason in a soup of belief?
  • the add-on-liars – Custom, or handing down one tradition from a previous age and forcing it on a new age, results in people supporting false notions. Nietzsche said, “… one lied to oneself, inventing reasons for these laws, simply to avoid admitting that one had become used to them and would no longer have it any other way. … And that is what one does, and has always done, within every prevailing morality and religion: the reasons and intents behind habits are invented only when some people start attacking the habits and asking for reasons and intents” (29).

Consciousness:

  • The aware, knowing element to the human mind. The singular force inside each human that must determine what is true and how to roll through life.
  • {much notation present in forum discussions}

As displayed over these past weeks, I like to break things down to see how they may be connected. If one of those things disprove the other, then I cannot see how a bridge could be formed – though there may be a way, I just cannot kin it. Consciousness is dependent on being aware of the truth, and reason further addresses the truth to discover motivation and intent as well as process and expectancy of outcome. Faith is dependent on belief. One of these is not like the other<>. Truth and belief are nemesis, on a serious level. Truth requires proof, evidence, and empirical considerations while belief is secured to superstition, religion, mysticism, spiritualism, occultism (and Santa Claus}. While Yin and Yang balance the other out, Truth and Belief are not comparable – one makes the other false, not equal. Imagine Truth as a baseball field and you are running the bases. Belief comes into play, and suddenly the ground is made up of water. Try to continue running the bases. You cannot. The bases are gone. There is no balance because one cannot reason themselves out of the situation. The moment one realized it was water and started to swim, the mind was already twisting around “how in the world did this happen? If the field is a pool then why would my coach tell me to wear cleats?” There is no reason here, no logic to deduce. Anything could happen. Down the rabbit hole we go! Reason and truth do not live in belief.

 

Works Cited

Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Gay Science. Ed. Bernard Williams. Trans.

Josefine Nauckhoff and Adrian del Caro. Cambridge, United

Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2015.

Thank you for the picture:  http://ldsmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/IllusionofMind-1024×768.jpg

Reblog attempt:  Food For Thought Friday #27: When Knowledge is not Power

Hello readers! And welcome to another instalment of Food For Thought Friday, which is my little way of expressing various ideas and thoughts to all of you. Today’s post focuses round the topic of  when knowledge cannot be seen as a powerful thing to have in your arsenal.  If you would like to read the […]

https://fsmithwrites.wordpress.com/2015/08/01/food-for-thought-friday-27-when-knowledge-is-not-power/

Essay: on Boethius’ Gifts of Fortune, Philosophy, and Reason

Contemplative Nature of Humankind:

on Boethius’ Gifts of Fortune, Philosophy, and Reason

by A.D. Shaffer

{Graduate Studies; originally written for Humanities 520 Fall 2014}

Who better to offer guidance than real aspects of human nature? Human aspects that assist the self in distinguishing emotional experience are displayed through contemplative reasoning and the guidance of Wisdom, Truth, Fate, and naturally – Philosophy. Boethius invokes the celestial elements of the universe along with the human experience; Reason and Philosophy grant him comfort: “There is a moral here for you to learn: / Deceitful are the goods you first discern. / Withdraw your neck, and leave their yoke behind; / Then truth at once will infiltrate your mind” (Boethius Book 3 Chapter 1 Verse 11-14).  Speaking of the autonomic self and the ability to contemplate appropriate actions via Reason, man is able to achieve fulfillment to duty while maintaining a decent grasp on self-love and community expectations. Philosophy suggests he look inward first, and return to the natural now that deceitful pleasures cannot sate his hunger. His exile and eventual death equated to a separation of the luxuriant and worldly customs which his position afforded him, raised as a privileged, though orphaned, child.

The significance in contemplation and the acknowledgement of human thought thrives passionately in his words, retreating back to when man and nature held closer bonds, when man remembered the plentiful splendor of the earth. Philosophy reminds Boethius that long ago, when man was natural, he loved the earth and succeeded in his life. She said, “Acorns at hand, when day was spent, / Sated their hunger. None then knew / the liquid honey to apply / To Bacchus’ gifts; nor to imbue / The sheen of silk with Tyrian dye” (Boethius Book 2 Chapter 5 Verse 4-8). Manners of old are noted as wholesome; man would benefit from a natural approach to life. The narrator speaks to the elements, as old as time, and personifies the abilities of man – to think and put into action possible changes which effect the world at large. The winds and sky are prevalent in The Consolation of Philosophy which implies respect and significance of the air and/or the vastness of the unknown; the sky as a natural wonder sure to offer hope.

The writing style of the text, at once personable and quick to empathize with, utilizes the sense of the divine through verse, and then on a deeper level demonstrates that man holds great gifts which he needs only to activate by acknowledgement of the struggle of man – that joy may be appreciated only when great sorrow is inflicted, that lifelong gifts of Fortune, once withdrawn, were still grand gifts to be pleasantly remembered in times of strife. Philosophy sings of the greed of man: “Relentless greed devours those earlier gains, / Reopens wide its jaws; / Can headlong lust be curbed by any reins, / Be bounded by fixed laws? // Thirst for possessions* blazes all the more, / The more those gifts extend; / With anxious sighs, believing he is poor, / The rich man hates to spend” (Boethius Book 2 Chapter 2 Verse 13-20). Man is greedy, filled with a lust for riches but loathe to let them go once attained; man is constantly wanting more without the appreciation of what he already has/is experiencing. Philosophy urges to absorb happiness as it comes, to store it up in memories so that in times of strife grand pleasure may be contemplated.

The imagery cast by Boethius in divine revelry of the celestial bodies {such as: the directional winds, firey volcanoes, abundant sands, crashing waves, bountiful soil, natural man} imply not only that man is related to an a priori connection and understanding of life, but also that Wisdom, Fortune, and Reason may or may not assist during the mortal struggle. The key factor is that man, once enlightened to life’s systematic offerings, understands the need for his suffering – one cannot know safety without experiencing fear, or recognize happiness if misery had not been a shadow. The careful man is noted by Philosophy as wise for respecting the east and south-west winds, steep mountainous terrain, consumptive sands, and wave-tossed deep and building, appropriately for safety and success (Boethius Book 2 Chapter 4 Verse 1-14). She goes on to say, “Enclosed by your walls’ silent strength, / You’ll live untroubled for the length / Of all your days; and by and by / Smile at the anger of the sky” (Boethius Book 2 Chapter 4 Verse 15-18). A careful man will succeed once he accepts his slice of the vast universe of life – man is not the center of existence but a mere counterpart.

Work Cited

Boethius. The Consolation of Philosophy. Trans. P.G. Walsh. New York: Oxford

University Press, 2008.

Picture c/o:  http://rjgeib.com/thoughts/boethius/hover.jpg

Essay: Synopsis of Descartes: On A Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting the Reason and Seeking Truth in the Sciences

Synopsis of Descartes:

On A Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting the Reason

and Seeking Truth in the Sciences

by A.D. Shaffer

{Graduate Studies; originally written for Humanities 530 Spring 2015}

Rene Descartes developed his personal philosophy through his own experiences inside of nature while addressing outside influences in which the self is formed. Cartesian dualism involves the separation of mind from body, or the spiritual experiences from the physical. Throughout the creation of his philosophy, Descartes notes that he is leery to publish his findings because his truths may not be the same as the truths of others. The truth, he moves, is subject to experience and cannot be learned from another individual insomuch that a person will better educate themselves by experiencing life.

Beginning in the academic sciences, Descartes holds that mathematics alone can be recognized as purely true as two plus two will always be four: “Beyond all, I was most pleas’d with the Mathematicks, for the certainty and evidence of the reasons thereof; but I did not yet observe their true use and thinking that it served only for Mechanick Arts…” (17). For his profession he choses the writing of letters so as to better experience the wonders of the world.

The importance of experience over lessons cannot be stressed enough as Descartes leads by example for the rest of humanity. He takes to travel to glean his own experiences: “I wholly gave over the study of Letters, and resolving to seek no other knowledge but what I could finde in my self, or in the great book of the world, I imployed the rest of my youth in Travell, to see Courts and Armies, to frequent people of severall humors and conditions, to gain experience, to hazard my self in those encounters of fortune …” (20). Through living life and writing of his objective opinion, Descartes advises to stick to the roads to avoid the dangers of the uncivilized woods in which he means for the individual to take advantage of known truths found in custom.

In architecture, Descartes preferred one builder to many because too many designers on one object would result in a catastrophic structure. He also favored fewer laws as the less laws there were in play, then more attention could be applied with strict observance. In his quest for truth, Descartes developed four laws of his philosophy: to accept nothing as true unless he was sure it was a known truth, to divide any difficulties into subsequent groups, to orderly lead his thoughts, and to critique his findings with specific calculation (35-36). False reason is seen as contemptible to Descartes as his religious beliefs ensured that God does not let falsity be present in the mind.

Cartesian dualism notes the separation from the physical of the mind, or two levels of existence: that of the material self and the thinking self or soul. Descartes said, “I knew then that I was a substance, whose whole essence or nature is, but to think, and who to be, hath need of no place, nor depends on any material thing. So that this Me, to wit, my Soul, by which I am what I am, is wholly distinct from the Body, and more easie to be known then it…” (59). The human act of contemplation allowed for Descartes to recognize the separation of materialism and spiritualism.

Works Cited

Descartes, Rene. A Discourse of a Method for the Well Guiding of Reason and the Discovery of

Truth in the Sciences. London: Thomas Newcombe, 1637. Project Gutenberg Ebook.

Picture c/o:  https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Frans_Hals_-_Portret_van_Ren%C3%A9_Descartes.jpg

Day Two…Bare with me while I figure this out

Blogging has been around for quite a while now, and I’m embarrassed to admit my ignorance. One doesn’t know until they experience a process so I thought I would give blogging a shot. These initial posts may not hold too much direction, but I hope to gain ground through the doing. Yesterday, I watched a TEDtalk on the importance of investing effort in the process of attaining one’s goals instead of investing in the outcome (Rao). The outcome, Rao holds, is uncontrollable by the individual, and he notes the importance of applying oneself to the only thing a person can control – their actions. The lecture suggests that happiness may be achieved by accepting the universe for what it is instead of what one wants it to be. As an experiment to justify his claim, Rao asks the audience to remember a time inside of nature in which one found peace and contentment. For me, that universal acceptance comes when gazing at the ocean. The intense pull of the tide calls to me on a primal level, and I can feel my cares melting away in mists of salt spray purity. Currently, I live in the mountains of West Virginia, and I haven’t been to the ocean in nearly two years. However, I can recall my moment of peace with the ocean because of the intensity in that moment. Thanks to Dr. Rao, I can find happiness inside of myself no matter my physical location.

Is this true for you? Where does your mind wander to find happiness? Please leave a comment depicting your individual moment shared with the universe.

Rao, Srikumar. “Plug into your Hard-Wired Happiness.” Online video. TEDtalk.com, Mar 2010. Accessed 24 Jun 2015.