Philosophy, as we know it, has several different functions,
their subject areas, the branches of philosophy tell us
what they are engaged with… epistemology, the study of
knowledge, focused on the nature of, origin, scope and limits
of knowledge… how do we know what we know? and for over 200 years,
from Descartes to Kant, this question of knowledge was the
priority of philosophy…the next age was concurrent with
this seeking epistemology, which was the Age of the Enlightenment,
which sought a slightly different path… this search was essentially
a search for the nature of our beliefs…Why do we hold such and
such belief? and the Enlightenment asked us, we hold a belief
in god, why do/should we believe in god? are our beliefs, our
beliefs or are they the beliefs of the state/society which as
indoctrinated into us? the vast majority of beliefs are beliefs
that have been indoctrinated into us as children…but because
we don’t examine our own beliefs, we don’t actually know what
beliefs are actually our beliefs and what beliefs have been
indoctrinated into us… are our beliefs, actually the beliefs
of the society/state/institutions that we belong to…
in a very real way, much of the problems/trouble of our
age stems from our failure to understand what beliefs are
actually, our beliefs and what beliefs have been indoctrinated into us…
I’d be willing to bet that the vast majority of beliefs have been
indoctrinated into us… but without some examination of those
beliefs and the nature of those beliefs, we cannot know what
belief/values are actually ours…
The three Kantian questions help us understand the problem
facing us… one, ''what am I to do?" two ‘‘What should I believe in?’’
and three, ''What can I know?" the Kantian question, ''What am I
to do?" is really dependent on the second question, ‘‘What should I
believe in?’’ if I believe in god, then should I engage in a religious
aspect of ''What am I to do?" should I hold to Christian actions,
to the point if I were to believe enough, should I be a priest, or
hold some other religious position, as my ''What am I to do?"
If I were to hold to religious values, then I should act, be a
Cristian, hold those values in my various dealings with other
human beings… and once again, we run into trouble
as many, including many around here, claim to be Christians
and yet, they engage in hatred of our neighbors, hated of those
who values we don’t hold… let us examine this in some detail…
RealUn claims he is a Christian, and yet, RealUn practices
hatred and bigotry against various groups, gays, trans, liberals..
I don’t know how he reconciles his beliefs in Christianity
with his words of hate…Which are clearly not Christian,
and not in line with the words of Jesus or the New Testament…
How does one reconcile the words we speak with the actions we
take? and if RealUn denies taking violent actions against those
he hates, then once again, his words are in conflict with his actions…
the words and the actions we have, must match…
And therein lies part of the modern problem, the words are
Christian, but the actions are not.. many claim to be religious
and yet, their actions are not religious, but of hate and bigotry
and prejudice… How do these people reconcile their words with
their actions? if I were a guessing person, I would say that those
people who words and actions don’t match, they simply pretend
or ignore this massive disconnect between their words and actions…
As RealUn does…
But I suspect that part of the problem with these hypocrites
and to be fair, others, is that their words and actions are ‘‘ad hoc’’
of the moment… for what were to happen if one were to use
their hate and anger, as values to be followed? As RealUn does…
What if everybody practiced the hate and anger and prejudice of
RealUn? This world would be even more messed up…
For to practice hate and prejudice as life values, is really just
another variation of the ‘‘State of Nature’’ of Hobbes…
for within a state/society that practices hate and prejudice,
cannot last long, it must fail for a state/society that
engages in hate and prejudice cannot build itself into
a coherent and viable state/society… it will fail because the
state/society, for its own survival must have a certain
amount of trust to function properly… If I go out and expect
violence to happen to me, the state/society itself has already
failed…and we return to this question of ''What am I to do?“…
Am I spending my days protecting what I have? that is no longer
a viable, working state/society…For me to engage in the question
of ''What am I to do?” requires a functional and working state/society
for me to engage with ''What am I to do?" as a question…
for the question ''What am I to do?" requires choices to be
a viable option… I must be able to choose ''what am I to do?"
if I don’t have a choice, then the question of ''What am I to do?"
has no meaning, is irrelevant…If I am to act as the state/society
demands, to be religious, to be a Nazi, to be a worker bee, and I
have no choice, then the question of ''what am I to do?" is pointless,
irrelevant… for the Kantian questions to work, they must be
choices for us to make in regard to ''What am I to do?" ''What
should I believe in?" ''What can I know?"
If I am forced to hold certain beliefs, as RealUn advocates,
then I have no choice in my beliefs and thus, the question
of ''What should I believe in?" become irrelevant… if I
have no choice in my values, my beliefs it becomes irrelevant
to what I actually believe in…and this is the type of state that
several here advocate, MR. A for example as well as RealUn…
and if beliefs are mandated as RealUn advocates, then the
question of ‘‘What can I know’’ also becomes irrelevant…
because what I can know is dictated by others, the state,
the society, god… my own values and beliefs are mandated,
dictated by others, then I have no free will, no choice…
and life without choices is no more than being an animal…
Which is the exact state we are trying to escape… as Nietzsche
pointed out, we are on the path of becoming, from animal to
becoming human…and if we accept this premise, then
the entire Kantian questions become a very different thing…
''What am I to do?" become a question of how do I go from
animal to becoming human?.. and the question of beliefs,
become a question within that path to becoming…if I can
freely hold this belief, I am no longer animal…for that is
the point of being animal, that there are no choices in being
an animal… biology/evolution determines what actions
an animal is capable of, and having no choice in that action,
we are dependent on instincts in this, and the further away
from instincts we can get, the closer to becoming human we
reach…and therein we reach the point where we realize
that being animal is really about not having choices, whereas
being human is about the choices we make…
and part of those choices is the Kantian questions…
Have you ever asked yourself, ''What am I to do?"
''What should I believe in?" ''What can I know?" then
you have engaged with philosophy in a very real
and honest way… which makes you a rare person indeed…
but I am willing to bet, given the threads/posts here, virtually no one
engages in the Kantian questions in a real and meaningful way…
Which is just another way of saying, that no one here seriously
engages with one of the other human questions which is
simple, ''How do I give my life meaning?" and is the hatred
and prejudice of those like RealUn, is that really giving my
life meaning and purpose? Now some may question why
I am attacking RealUn? he is just a useful idiot to show us
the questions of existence aren’t about hate, prejudice or anger…
but about choosing our own answers to the questions,
''What am I to do?" ''What should I believe in?"
''What can I know?"
and the choices involved in each of these questions…
what choices are you making and why those choices?
Kropotkin
