|
zephyroftheNorth -> RE: The Philosophy (12/3/2009 2:40:08 PM)
|
Greetings Naturallurker,
quote:
ORIGINAL: Naturallurker
I don't think for one moment that you personally didn't want to see it was there or you wouldn't have asked the question. Perhaps I should have signposted my use of the word you was in the broad sense. I suspect you underestimate what your child self took from Hansel and Gretel, such is the power of morality tales and fairy stories that while children cannot articulate what it is they receive from reading or hearing such tales it does filter through to them, along with all the other lessons life delivers in child friendly form.
Thank you for clarifying your usage of the word "you". It's entirely possible that I took more from Hansel and Gretel than I realised.
quote:
don't think you did quite understand me correctly, in order to embrace any philosophy you must recognise it as your own, come to it on your own. To embrace any philosophy(including the Gorean philosophy you must understand it. Whether you (broad you again) do that on a cognitive level or on an instinctual or subliminal level (IE The Hansel and Gretel level) is (as an adult) a choice. In order to make an informed choice about which if any form of philosophy one wishes to follow or incorporate into one's life one must know that philosophy. IE win that truth for your self. In order to make an informed choice you must choose to start walking the path of exploration. It is particularly pertinent to the Gorean philosophy because of the ideas the Gorean Philosophy holds to be truths.
Again I agree, although I think it's possible to absorb more of the philosophy than one thinks is being absorbed, in other words absorbing parts of it "intentionally" and others without consciously knowing it.
quote:
My view is that we are all capable of doing that, the choice to do so or not to do so lies within the individual.
In a way yes, it is a choice, but in the case that it is absorbed subconsciously of course it isn't a choice, it just happens.
quote:
For example, person A might say, Gorean Philosophy is primal and visceral, it appeals to the primitive in us. If they are parroting that idea from another source then it has not yet become their truth, if however they have done the work on themselves and the philosophy and still reached that conclusion they have won it for themselves. Person B, might have taken the clues they saw in the texts and rationalised that the Gorean Philosophy was an aesthetic philosophy, based on further studies and comparison between various philosophers. Given sufficient time, and the tools to argue using a philosophical methodology both A and B might well be able to each prove the case for their won truths, while appearing to disagree with one another.
Person C might have read the populist view point and not bothered with the books beyond a quick skim reading and go on superficially to argue every tenet and virtue contained with in in the books, they might even be able to toss terms like master morality and slave morality about with gusto. Meanwhile Person D reads, internalises and proceeds to live. That is not to say that person D, cannot honestly accept the sound and valid arguments he has recognised and repeats. While that may sound contradictory it is merely a way of saying acceptance and embracing do not have parity. E.G. A child accepts that lying to mum n dad is wrong, absorbing via a multitude of sources that idea to be true, an adult who embraces that lying is wrong has asked himself why, what if, on what authority etc etc and reached the conclusion himself that to lie is wrong for him.
If there is one thing I have learned hanging out and reading the posts on this board, it is that there is no right way to interpret the GP. It's very much an individual thing and each will internalize it in his/her own way. It's one of the things that makes being around Goreans so fascinating.
quote:
While those with a love of philosophy in general happily argue and explore and make comment at times, being Gorean, or following a Gorean Philosophy isn't a contest. You, and this time I do mean you, do not need anyone to tell you what you understand, you don't need anyone to tell you what you internalise, you either win your own truths or you don't. How you do so is up to you, I just happen to think that too many people sell themselves short and understand a lot more than they can articulate, while a good few articulate a lot more than they understand [;)].
Some of the most interesting posts I have read here have been conversations between two or more people discussing philosophy in general, sometimes as it pertains to the GP sometimes not. A good deal of it just goes whoosh over my head, but sometimes I come away from reading it with something to think about and chew over. It's entirely possible that I already understand more of the GP than I think I do.
quote:
Philosophy on the whole tends to appear clear as mud [;)] I hope I have been a little clearer this time.
A good primer on how to read philosophical works can be found here
I don't even think it's THAT clear, lol. In college I had a friend taking Philosophy and he tried to get me to understand it. He failed spectacularly as my brain stubbornly refused to absorb it. He ended up frustrated and I ended up with a migraine. Thanks for the link, I'll take a look later. Right now it's time for supper [:)]
I wish you well,
Zeph
|
|
|
|
