Even with vast, incredibly, unbelievable loads of information available at the press of a button (teh internets), most people still don’t really care about the shiz ur talking about, they care about getting their dick wet / pussy slammed / watching kittens on youtube. Your hypothesis that most people will one day care seems, like i said, pretty unlikely.
“Next time on Knowledge County”
Kimberly is pissed cause Chrissy stole her boyfriend from her - but Kim’s been sleeping with Chris behind his back anyways!
And when I say boyfriend, I mean abstract metaphors garnered from logical inquiry, and by sleeping with, I mean sitting in silence listening to the glory of human thought.
I based my hypothesis on many things, none of them being the fact that most or even many people care about philosophy or other non-distraction, immediate gratification sort of stimulation. Of course most people are, how should I put it, morons. That goes without saying. Yet if you bothered to read what I wrote here, you would see I base my point here on many different ideas and perspectives, ways of looking at the present situation and the history that has given rise to this present.
So were you going to address what I actually wrote here to you, in response to your demand that I defend my ideas here, or are you merely going to ignore it and thus demonstrate your true intent here of making a lot of noise without actually challenging your thoughts and conceptions at all? Are you as intellectually closed and dishonest as most people you so easily criticize?
Just as in Science, the acquisition of wisdom is nothing if you aren’t going to do anything with it.
i don’t know about you, but i think what i and mr gobbo said do apply to your post. you didn’t account for that.
so don’t pull that “intellecutally closed/dishonest” shit and actually respond to the criticism.
Let me refresh your memory, since you seem unable to read what I have written. Here is how our conversation went:
What was your response to this? To point out that people want to fuck and watch kittens on youtube.
Perhaps even you are able to see your duplicitous nature here?
oh boy, first of all your whole post is completely vague, using incredibly abstract concepts very loosely to get to your conclusion, very very sloppy – the epitome of sophistry.
man is a curious being who seeks to understand? what’s “man”? what the hell is that? i don’t know what that is. is every man like that? to what extent? most men i know aren’t really interested in understanding all that much.
religion, literature adn science are a story of attempted self-discovery and self-mastery? what does that even mean? how do you know that?
“to be human is to be an entity whose own existence has become an issue for it.” BEEEEEEP wrong. not correct.
and on top of that all – and as evidence for what i’ve said – take into account what gobbo and i said.
talking with these big, sprawling ideas like “the nature of man” only serves to muddy the issue and make your argument unclear – and incorrect. i know it’s the cliche way to do philosophy, and it might even be kinda fun, but it’s not actually useful if ur interested in being clear and actually discussing ideas.
You come dangerously close to self-awareness here by invoking sophistry… I would be cautious if I were you. I am sure your present personality construct has been working out well for you, since it has become so apparently rigidified.
More to the point here, are you unable to discuss in abstractions? What philosophers have you read? Are you aware that philosophy takes place regularly on the level of meta-conceptual abstraction?
You are unfamiliar with the use of the term ‘man’ to designate the human species generally? I must say I am surprised you even frequent this website, if you are really so inexperienced with and confused about the most very basic of philosophic terminology.
I have already conceded this point, now it is on you to demonstrate how this point refutes or even meets the other primary arguments I have put forward here.
Religion is a means of developing attempted universal symbols of meaning to craft a human story and narrative, from which is then to be derived deeper human understanding and purpose. Literature is this same process individuated and refined, of crafting narratives and metaphors of meaning that allow man better access to his own thoughts, feelings, desires, needs, hopes, etc. Science is the division of philosophical inquiry into specialized fields of study, that reveal more of the “world” to us, which is to say, increasing human knowledge and depth of understanding. Man is a curious animal, he seeks understanding. This is in his nature, after all it is his primary means of survival, and so not surprising it would grow to the level of instinct itself.
No? And why not? Man is an animal that has developed awareness not only of his external environment, as all animals to done, but awareness of his inner spheres as well, of thoughts, feelings, instincts, drives and desires. Man conceptualizes inner and outer environment in symbolic representation in the mind, with words and images. For man, unlike other animals, his own existence has become a central concern for that very existence itself.
I have already conceded this. As I mentioned, it is on you now to demonstrate how this point refutes or counters my arguments here.
if man doesn’t mean men in general, but just some men, then your statement is pointless.
if by “man does x” you just mean “some men do x” then i could say “man is inclined to shit in the mouths of other men” because some men do it.
i mean if that’s really how you’re going to use the word “man”…come on.
ur making broad statements about mankind and then concede that they don’t apply to most men. it doesn’t make sense bro.
i still think ttg is trying to get across that we need to start treating people nicely and forget the judeo-christian god…
lol ok turtle, it’s ur nap time
jesus—what do you think he is proposing in 25 wrds or less…bet you dont know…
lol u can’t test me until you learn the basics of logic and how to read. nobody is saying anything about treating people nicely and forgetting the judeo-christian god. you’re projecting your own bullshit onto his words. that’s not even close to what he’s saying.
you dont know what he is writing…
i know he’s not writing that.
Brilliant. 
what is he writing…watch out this may be a trick question…
it’s not a trick question, it’s not a question at all. you can read it for yourself buddy.