You have talked and are talking about a lot of things.But have you ever tried to answer the question below which is in my idea the main question of philosophy?
What should human do?
I invite every one to answer this question here in the way s\he thinks is right.
Not just be human anymore.
The question doesn’t make sense to me.
A human can’t help but do. Whatever “do” is at any particular moment. What else is there?
I agree that this is the main question of philosophy. But philosophy is a paradox. For it presupposes that the following provisional answer has already been given: “As long as wisdom (i.e., knowledge of the truth) has not been found, what man should do is philosophise (i.e., seek wisdom).” But because this answer is presupposed by it, it should also question itself: for it knows that it does not know whether that answer is right. “Should man philosophise? Should he not unquestioningly accept the dogma he is raised with?” As soon as said provisional answer is deemed right, it itself becomes dogma. But there is a more fundamental question than the main question of philosophy. It asks: “Is there something man ‘should’ do?” And before we can even begin to answer this, we have to determine what “should” means here.
etymonline.com/index.php?term=shall
etymonline.com/index.php?term=ought
With man’s realisation that he does not know whether he should even suppose that he should do anything, philosophy becomes science.
Not that you will understand it, but;
Clarify, Verify, and Remember the Hopes and Threats toward the Maximum Momentum of Self-Harmony.
And if he can’t understand that, he should;
Seek to understand - “Clarify, Verify, and Remember the Hopes and Threats toward the Maximum Momentum of Self-Harmony.”
The WAY he should seek to understand it is; “Clarify, Verify, and Remember the Hopes and Threats toward the Maximum Momentum of Self-Harmony.”
For some reason or another you want to be at harmony with yourself. Why can’t you be at harmony with yourself? That’s the main question that I ask you. Why does it always have to be tomorrow or the day after tomorrow?
What can the answers to this question be based on?
Human should do those thing which gives him pleasure.
Everyone must live for pleasure because pleasure is ultimate.
Thank you.
Ah, nostalgia.
Monk, you remind me of a bobblehead version of Joker.
Thank you Moron.(Oran?)
I think it most wise for a human to do whatever he thinks will make him smile on his deathbed.
If that was directed at me, it is a bit like asking why can’t you be taller today, why wait until tomorrow?
Much like having a wife and children, you cannot merely proclaim harmony and expect eternal smiles. That is why they invented rebellion, PMS, and divorce. Your body, emotions, and mind are NOT your slaves, regardless of what you might think. To get them in harmony and keep them there takes care, understanding, patience, and wisdom in a variety of subjects.
Let’s be careful, folks.
Understood. But coming to terms with your life as it is has something to do with harmony. You can’t be in harmony with world out there if you’re not at harmony with yourself inside. And a major part of understanding this is to understand that there is no way of understanding things by means of depending on what an outside influence or authority expects you to understand. And how others lack understanding of your own usual, ordinary, independent state would be of no concern to you. After all, when you’re touching life at a place that is unique to your natural peace and harmony, everything that everyone else has known, felt and experienced is not entirely there. But to strive to be something other than what you are requires that you do a lot of things, creating a division between what you are and what you should be resulting in a disturbance and violence inside.
I cannot create the yearning for wisdom in someone else. How can I create that desire in others? If one has the desire, he will look around and find that whatever is offered is not 100% satisfying anyway. If satisfied with crumbs, all right. That’s what the so called wise experts are doing, throwing some crumbs, like they do to the dog on a leash. Humans are like animals, no different. If we accept the fact that we are not different, then there is a better chance that we will act as humans.
When man ceases to pursue the goal of an ideal man, he will act human.
I knew I should have rephrased the idea, but the form it came to me in was apt. I didn’t mean offense, and the comment was about the post and not the monk, I do apologize, though, it was unecessary.
Hey.scientists say that there was a time that there was no human in the universe.then sth happened and there was a human.
before and after it a lot of kinds of animals were created.now we have billions kinds of creatures and just one of those kinds is a creature that can think and decide.well if you think this is just an accident then I have nothing to tell to you.But if you(like me)think that it has a meanings,you must accept that we humans came to this world for sth.and I think the main question of philosophy is finding that thing.
I’m a muslem.I’ve read in our holy book that when a perfect man dies,god says come and enjoy all joys I’ve prepared for you.But the best reward is meeting me.when I’m satisfied of you and you,of me.
I believe in it strongly and as someone interested in philosophy thought about a way of life which leads us to this destiny.
Yes part of it is enjoying but it defines some proper joys.ones that also make you progress.
I mean this.I know there are lots of ideas.I wanna hear them.I hope you’ve understood.
I feel invited to wonder whether it is better to be a human being or a human doing. I suppose this invites a next question, that is, just what is a human being? Uh oh… now we’re descending down the slippery slope of ontology like Super-skier doing 90 mph, with so many ontological traps to catch the edge of our ski on. That settles it, it’s clearly better to be a human doing.
So, what should the typical prototypal human represented by anyone, do exactly? I have no idea, so I think I’ll return to being, saying with Hamlet: “To be or not to be, that is the question.” But then, how can it be that I, or anyone, am here as a being to question the relative value of being and doing? And thus, here lies Super-skier at the bottom of the slope looking up through arms and legs akimbo tangled in the skis . . .
SUPER SKIER
They called him super skier as he sat around the sundeck,
and he swore that he’d never spill.
When they finally took him down they had to use three toboggans
to carry all the pieces down the hill
(ch)Oh he was slippin’ down the slope going nintey miles an hour
when he caught an edge of his ski.
Oh his clothes they were fast, but the slopes they were faster,
that’s the last of super skier we shall see.
(Sung to the tune of Charlie on the MTA. youtube.com/watch?v=gZZ0o_fSgAw )
…be the best that one can be.
Please observe the matter carefully then warn.
…that was done here Monk - retaliation is not always the smartest move… ya get me 