It’s hilarious how quickly Biggus jumps, from “the gap” in knowledge and understanding, to knowing all sorts of things about other people.
And then there are the times when does a complete 180 and he actually expresses scorn for those who refer to the “the gap” … as if they are doing something wrong. For example, when religious people talk about God’s mysterious ways. That’s “the gap” right there, isn’t it?
Let’s face it. Shopenhauerian pessimism was merely a luxury ridden view of sadly flying down from the perch of the bird’s eye view.it drained vital energy more, to come down.
.
From ancient foundations, now only the glitter of it attracts and most stumbling blocks forgotten
Nietzche tried to replace that metaphoric hubris with It most generally looking boldly back, turning it into anathema, a fearful descent
The violation of primal consent is overcome, by muffling cries of innocent babes, "why did the bring me forth from my comfortable domain, the attractive womb, mow again to be raped over and over, into the harsh direct gaze of europa? Did not a colony of bees, raping her emitting the sweet ofir, from ejaculate honey that bear so much restrained poesy? To be or not, indifferent to all, but the soblimest rhetoric?
Rubbish.
a Light-Year is not a time period but a distance; the distance travelled by light in one year.
The centre of the galaxy is 25,000 Light years away.
Currently the fastest ever space craft achieved an amazing 0.05% of the speed of light. Do the maths!
At the same time, if you begin with the humble premise of knowing nothing, you can then begin the expedition of seeking out the questions and answers and knowledge regarding Life. Considering all that can be and is to be someday known in this Universe of ours, in comparison, we do KNOW NOTHING!
I am not so sure that wisdom necessarily comes from knowledge (though of course, if utilized properly, it may) If that is the case then knowledge does not live up to its reputation. I think of wisdom as more of an inner light, a beacon so to speak.
That beacon, that light, is what leads us on the quest to knowledge.
Perhaps Intelligence is more the application of Knowledge.
So what came first, wisdom or knowledge?
The chicken or the egg?
Wisdom, knowledge, intelligence. None of these are natural categories, but socially constructed means by which we tend to describe various phenomena related to positive conscious activities.
You might just as well say that we start with wisdom enough to seek knowledge as gain wisdom from it. Or that either intelligence is the egg from which wisdom grows or vice versa.
None of this leads to understanding. Its more like restatement of assumptions and prejudices.
By the same token charateristics we decide are negative attributes we nominate as stupidity etc…
But one man’s stupidity is another man’s wisdom.
First, of course, I note that I may well be mistaken about what I have surmised regarding him here. We would have to focus in on a particular set of circumstances and explore the extent to which his value judgments either have changed over the years since we began these exchanges or have not changed much at all. The extent to which he still sees himself as a moral objectivist.
But mostly what “I” note with him is how he never seems to be all that far removed from “retort” mode with me. Or from out and out Stooge mode. The caustic inflection he can sustain that [to me] seems to revolve around the sort of contempt that objectivists over the years have reserved for me precisely because I am chipping away at their once rock solid Self.
Well, in the is/ought world anyway.
Not that there wouldn’t still be an enormous gap between what we think we know about each other here and all that there is to be known about each other. From, say, the perspective of what he still might construe God to be?
Please, let him note another example of this. I’m not able to grasp his point here in regard to God’s mysterious ways at all. Who referred to “the gap” here as if they were doing what wrong?
As for God’s mysterious ways, my main interest remains as always focused in on the existential relationships I explore here: ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop … 5&t=186929
The paradox here though is that even though I acknowledge “the gap” renders these exchanges as no less ultimately futile, I am still predisposed existentially to pursue them anyway. The rest being ineffably entangled in this…
“He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest.” John Fowles
…and [of course] godot.
Yes, and of course, that infinite microcausm h a ultimately been reduced to the imperceptible, none the less, it remains an enigmatic and variable juxtopisition between the real and unreal
That variences is a flow, a sign wave that is precipitously speeding up, so as to create the film of illusive reality for real.
That means that ultimately, one becomes his only certain observer.
Don’t perceive this waaaay out, rather way in.
Take it up with nasa.
And, come on, admit it, the only reason you responded at all here is so that you can – yet again! – call something that one of us posted “rubbish”.
My best guess:
Something or someone in your life must have really pissed you off. You can’t do anything about that so you come into venues like this one and take it out on all the rest of us. Mostly in regard to God and religion but it can really be about anything at all.
Right?
That’s what most interests me about you. Not what you post but why you seem compelled to treat others who don’t share your own fulminating fanatic dogmas with such contempt. Sure, I feel much the same incredulous bewilderment about those like, say, FreeSpirit1983. How on earth did they manage to think themselves into believing such…nonsense?
But that’s my “thing” here. Exploring not what they believe about God and religion and Saints and Hell, but how existentially they came to believe it given the manner in which I construe the meaning of dasein.
I’ve been after those like phyllo here now for years in regard to that. But they almost always keep everything up in the intellectual or the spiritual clouds. Their “world of words” psychologisms – think Maia!! – that will probably keep them comforted and consoled all the way to the grave.
Insulting them changes nothing. Just accept that with so much at stake on both sides of the grave for them not much that folks like you and I bring up is ever likely to change much.
Stoicism is the only practical reaction that one can have in dealing with the moral and political and spiritual and religious objectivists.
That and the part where one of them might actually be right and does succeed in allowing me to pull myself up out of “the hole” I’ve dug myself down into philosophically.
Alan Sokal to meno:
Consider one or another spell check app, please: freeappsforme.com/spell-checking-apps/
It’s quite embarrassing. For both of us.
I didn’t say wisdom comes from knowledge, I said that wisdom is the APPLICATION OF KNOWLEDGE. You can have knowledge and not know how to apply it, which means you don’t have the wisdom to apply that knowledge.
Having knowledge and no wisdom is basically just an encyclopedia. It “knows” the facts, but can not apply any of it to a real life scenario.
One can be “book smart” and have no wisdom. They don’t know what to do with their knowledge. They don’t know how to apply their knowledge.
Chickens didn’t pop out of nowhere, they came from an egg. Asking where the egg came from is changing the goal posts! 
Nasa and all science and maths agrees with me.
Well, all science and the maths then seem to confirm that the gap between “I” and “all there is” just in the Milky Way galaxy alone is nothing short of staggering.
Thus there’s still this part: that what any of us agree or disagree about is embedded in the fact that we are all but infinitesimally tiny and insignificant specks of existence in the context of all there is. Thus further noting that what we think about God and religion and philosophy ILP style given the gap between “I” and the complete understanding of existence itself is nothing short of unimaginably staggering.
And, with you, this part:
None of this changes the fact that a light year is a DISTANCE.
The only thing that is staggering is that you won’t admit to a simple mistake
K: space/ time… in other words, they are one and the same, at least according to
Einstein…how would you sort out something that is one and the same? with
all that said, move on with your points…to insists on that one point, distance… time
is on the road to becoming pedantic…notice I didn’t say it was pedantic, just
holding to this point is on the road to being pedantic…
Kropotkin
Course , have had a rough patch along the way with insomnia , sorry bout that. Too late to edit.
Why can’t Biggus just admit that he made a mistake on the distance to Galactic Center and he meant to write “years” instead of “light-years”?
So much simpler and more honest than what he is doing.
Actually, the fact is that you accuse me of this when the points raised in bold above was taken from an article I read in regard to an assessment from nasa. So, if there is a mistake, I am not the one who made it. Besides, the point was that even if we could travel at 186,000 miles a second it would still take us four and a half of our years to reach that destination. The main point then being to note just how simply staggeringly immense just our own galaxy is in an observable universe containing about 200 billion additional galaxies: nasa.gov/feature/goddard/20 … ly-thought
Now, in regard to your own particular “I” here what are the odds that those who don’t agree with everything that you say are talking “rubbish”?
Taking me back to this:
Let’s explore this together, okay? If nothing else, you may well succeed in embarrassing yourself less.
How did I make the mistake in merely noting an assessment from nasa above?
Oh, and when are you going to get around to responding substantively to the points I raised about the points you raised about me above. Think of all the additional mistakes you might find!!!
And mostly what I am doing with you is chipping away at whatever is left of your very own Real Me. Convince me that it is as rock solid as it once was 10 years ago.
After all, how else to explain your at times barely contained reaction to me? 
Even regarding something that is basically irrelevant to the point I am making about “the gap” in exploring what you think you know about abortion and Communism and all that there is to be known going back to all that none of us really know about the existence of existence itself.
Chip…chip…chip, 
Do you need someone to talk to?
