“The philosophers of the future, though hostile to dogmatism, will be friends of truth.”…so said one the highest of men.
Suppose truth is like a woman: tantalizing, erotic, elusive, yes, but but also like God, jealous and demanding. And what if what we want is not a friend at all, but a lover for ourselves, to possess and command? She is not easily dominated, but the desire exists to subdue and control her. How possessive we can be even of our friends.
It is one of the highest hope that friends of truth won’t become dogmatic. But the hostility towards dogmatism is in itself a new dogma.
the philosophers of the future will find the wisdom in respecting both sexes. and the wisdom of not being possessive. friends included.
and see the wisdom of not being so much " hostile" towards dogma but at least question dogma. in a sound , Reasoned way. and for those who are on the side of dogma to see its faults , in a sound Reasonable way.
sound clear Reasoning , with equity , is the Reasoning of the future.
A revolution in thought every once in a while is a good thing. There’s nothing wrong with perspectivism unless it becomes nihilistic. In that while accepting that all truth is subjective, one runs the risk of becoming avertable to all truth, even one’s own. This aversion arrests one from creating their own truth, and therein lies the possible problem with dogmatism towards dogma.
What’s wrong with nihilism, one might ask?
I’m glad somebody might asked.
Well Billy, the average man, the ‘common sense’ man has to have an ideology, even if it’s not their own, in order to fit into a society. They need to believe this truth and follow it’s behavioral codes, accept their sense of right and wrong, thereby becoming an agent of that society. The philosopher however, cannot hold any truth of their own, for that truth will skew their perception of different ‘truths’. This is the fundamental difference between a preacher and a philosopher, Timmy. One preaches another’s, and in some rare cases their own truth, while the other, the philosopher, presents truths as relative, and shuts them up about how they’re in possession of THE truth.
“Does that mean that…”
Correct, Bobby. This does mean that real philosophy started when relativity in truth became apparent, and YES, that philosophy before that was men using their reason in order to prove their truth, which they were brought up to accept, as THE truth.
How and why be a good greek --the greeks
This world does not make sense given God as real, so this is how truth must really be. --Descartes
How to be a good Christian, and why --Kant
Why Buddhism is awesome. --Schopenhauer
And the beginning of real philosophy:
How and why you’re all stupid. --Nietzsche
Ain’t that the truth.
The woman analogy merely suggests thats memes (what is ‘truth’ after all but another meme?) are seductive and alluring.
In turn, just as we might not be looking for a ‘friend’ when courting an object of sexual attraction, so too when seeking truth we do not wish to find an acquaintance, but a possession. We want complete control of our truth. We want to be able to shape and mend it to our specific tastes.
Most of us are pretty good at this. Truths are always held in high regard, especially metaphysical truths. We make our truths, put them at the very zenith of the intellectual hierarchy, and configure the rest of our thought patterns in relation to them. Like a lover, truths demand attention and consideration. They must be defended. They must be dominated. They must be understood so well that, should an enemy pose a threat, they will be safe.
To varying degrees and by various methods, then, do people protect their truths. ‘Dogma’ becomes those truths that are untouchable - locked away with the most sacred ‘facts’ - and cannot be challenged or even chipped away at.
Some people have more material in this sacred category than others. But rest assured, everyone has plenty - plenty of dogmas, that is. Your truth is your dogma. They coexist, occupying the same intellectual space.
All truths are potentially dogmas. We use logic, philosophy and the like so that we might expose them as such. Once a truth has been identified as a dogma, some choose to relocate it to an area of much lower status in the hierarchy, while others can (and do) leave them right where they were - as ‘truths’ or ‘facts’.
Friends of truth are those who do not care enough about truth. Their sacred rooms are infested with dogmas. They are passive in their interaction with them. It is by contrast that lovers of truth understand how seductive, coy, manipulative and cunning it can be; that they must, should they wish to dominate reality, confront even the most unquestioned facts. When these friends of truth are dogmatic, it is something quite different than when lovers of truth are dogmatic.
Which can only be a positive thing. As the meme ‘be hostel toward dogmatism’ spreads, even at a slow rate, its manifestation is that of a critical and rigorous thinker, depending only on the rate at which one implements it.
The more lovers of truth, the fewer friends of truth, the better.
Hello Daybreak:
— The woman analogy merely suggests thats memes (what is ‘truth’ after all but another meme?) are seductive and alluring.
O- My comment on that is that the seductivity of a woman rest on the eye that beholds it. To continue the metaphor, a homosexual man, take as another “truth”, sees nothing seductive in that woman. That desire to control is variable depending on the person observing that woman. If the man is heterosexual, he might still be a happily married man and pay no mind to the seductions of this woman.
Memes are difficult to define, but they do propagate like truths. But the propagation depends on the strenght of the previous meme. National Socialism was a meme that was less transmittable among Catholics, who had a different, and as strong meme in Christianity.
Be it as it is, what we find is that there is not just one woman, nor just one meme at any given time available to an individual, but the meme in hand is his woman, his truth, THE truth, so he tells himself.
As when a man marries a woman, the holder of the meme renounces possessing any other memes. What makes one forget about one’s woman however? Another woman. What destroys our belief in any given Truth? Another Truth indeed.
— In turn, just as we might not be looking for a ‘friend’ when courting an object of sexual attraction, so too when seeking truth we do not wish to find an acquaintance, but a possession. We want complete control of our truth. We want to be able to shape and mend it to our specific tastes.
O- And to do this, you must submitt to her as well. We may rebuke a friend, in our frienship, but not our lover out of love. We not only shape it, clothe it and adorn her, but she also attaches our armour, our shield and spear, and we go into battle to defend her.
— Most of us are pretty good at this. Truths are always held in high regard, especially metaphysical truths. We make our truths, put them at the very zenith of the intellectual hierarchy, and configure the rest of our thought patterns in relation to them. Like a lover, truths demand attention and consideration. They must be defended. They must be dominated. They must be understood so well that, should an enemy pose a threat, they will be safe.
O- I agree, as you see, but here is the thing: We make our truths- we put them at the very zenith- we who make them into dogmas. And if we have done it before then why do we think we will not do it again? When we discover that a dogma is untrue and chip away at it, is our chisel of a softer material than the rock it must chip off? No. Indeed, the chisel stands as a greater, more polished truth that in time becomes THE truth. Nietzsche did not worry in vain that he would gain believers, because humanity itself is great at believing. Doubt is certainly great, but doubt is simply another tool for the meme. The early christians were great at doubting, just like today. They are the greatest atheists of other gods. Same with other religions about other gods too. They see tolerance of another as a requirement because they see an imperfect path to the same truth in the Other, that is found in perfect form in theirs.
— To varying degrees and by various methods, then, do people protect their truths. ‘Dogma’ becomes those truths that are untouchable - locked away with the most sacred ‘facts’ - and cannot be challenged or even chipped away at.
O- But not all dogma is explicit. Dogma is the belief in which the rest of our thoughts find support. By this belief, this Truth, you can classify them. You classify christians by their unerrant belief in the divinity of Christ, who died for our sins and was raised from the dead that whomsoever believe in him shall not be lost but saved in his name, yada,yada,yadada. After this is accepted, one might disagree about the details in the narrative without losing the qualification of “christian” because Christ is out of question.
Same with Darwinism, or perspectivism or some other “ism”. It is an ism by virtue of it’s dogma. It is not just the usual suspects like jews that become an “ism”.
— Some people have more material in this sacred category than others. But rest assured, everyone has plenty - plenty of dogmas, that is. Your truth is your dogma. They coexist, occupying the same intellectual space.
O- Very true. And even if it wasn’t true, we would need truth in order to deny that it was true. That is the paradox.
— All truths are potentially dogmas. We use logic, philosophy and the like so that we might expose them as such. Once a truth has been identified as a dogma, some choose to relocate it to an area of much lower status in the hierarchy, while others can (and do) leave them right where they were - as ‘truths’ or ‘facts’.
O- Worse. For philosophy to be strong enough to overthrow dogmas, it must reach the status of a dogma itself.
— Friends of truth are those who do not care enough about truth. Their sacred rooms are infested with dogmas.
O- That would be contradictory. If you do not care enough about them then why do you keep your rooms filled with their infestation?
— They are passive in their interaction with them.
O- I do not draw so sharp a distinction. What was Patroclus to Achilles? A lover or a friend? How often we lust after one of our very good friends? When the truth is a woman, and we find her attractive, “friends” is a simple farce we play.
— It is by contrast that lovers of truth understand how seductive, coy, manipulative and cunning it can be; that they must, should they wish to dominate reality, confront even the most unquestioned facts.
O- The confront even the most unquestioned “facts”, like Socrates, because to them these were not facts at all to begin with. These were not women but old hags past their prime and full of wrinkles. They are able to question unquestion facts because they now possess other unquestioned (by them) facts.
— Which can only be a positive thing.
O- No because it is blind to this. The dogmatist now is “undogmatic”.
— As the meme ‘be hostel toward dogmatism’ spreads, even at a slow rate, its manifestation is that of a critical and rigorous thinker, depending only on the rate at which one implements it.
O- Critical of all except his own criticism, thus not very critical. The eye does not see itself. I am not saying that some other way exist, but that between theism and atheism there is agnosticism…but who has the stomach for that?
it is the truths themselves that need to be upheld, domination is held in the form of decifiring motivation necesitating the need for truth, though truth will always be truth;belief
once known it becomes subjective
your only as smart as your beliefs;unknown subjectives
rack your brain all day,it will reveal nothing other than yourself
women"truth" being ouside of yourself exist as pure belief, therefore-rather it is the urge to let truth step ouside your none beliefs, to let truth be revealed, regardless of (the) nature, that it being known and believed forebaring and rational
can’t never rationalize the statagize
e just dropped some knowledge, turn the beat around-always and foreever!prewiew then submit to her beliefs
did god cross-over, I think not
it was more like a dunk, I am god let it be known, oh was that a meme
I think not-she don’t joke-get it-boring-take it serious-get it, truth-and so on and so on…