quote:

  Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source



phi·los·o·phy       (fĭ-lŏs'ə-fē)  Pronunciation Key 
n.   pl. phi·los·o·phies

Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.

Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.

A system of thought based on or involving such inquiry: the philosophy of Hume.

The critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs.

The disciplines presented in university curriculums of science and the liberal arts, except medicine, law, and theology.

The discipline comprising logic, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and epistemology.

A set of ideas or beliefs relating to a particular field or activity; an underlying theory: an original philosophy of advertising.

A system of values by which one lives: has an unusual philosophy of life.

quote:

  A short response... what are you comparing to, to determine if that if Customs and Philosophies (which are the same see the defination of the same at the end of this post).

"Ah but I didn't say incorrect, I asked for a part of the philosophy that was illegal.  You are asking me to prove a double negative which is a rather illogical thing to do."

As clearly defined below, I have pointed out in several instance porition of the Gorean philosophy that would otherwise violate the laws of society. You have not defined what philosophy or part thereof that you reference to maintain that the same does not violate societies law or laws (not being illegal). However, you do continue to maintain that the "philosophy" or "philosophies" do not without qualifing your contentions nor providing any example thereof that would otherwise contradict my contentions.

quote:

  However, you have not made the case that the above does not apply. As to what of the philosophy is legal then about the above? The only thing is the lack of the practice of it, which I do believe I have mentioned. I have further mentioned just because something within the confines of a stated philosophy is illegal does not negate said aspect from the philosophy, but merely makes the practice thereof illegal in the eyes of societies law.

quote:

  "The question then becomes were these people there as examples of the philosophy, or were there as window dressing to show how the other side of the coin looked.  See if you want to get literal, and look at each spot on the page, sometimes you miss the big picture while counting the dots per inch.  Take it in its entirety and adjust your blinders, any point that is made can be contradicted by another quote, it's kind of funny how they were written that way. "

Again, generalizations that are kept overly broad, ambigious, vague, and therefore intelligible so that said defination that you are purporting may exist. Again, are you comparing apples with apples, apples with pears, or applies with rhino's to substatitate your conclusion(s)?

"There are of course things beyond the code, laws, and "natural" behavior; people are funny that way.  When one goes against that natural wiring, is it any surprise that the body begins to reject it, even if they are conditioned to go against that nature?   We as a society wonder why there are so many medical problems?  Perhaps it is because we (the very broad general sense of the word) have stopped living by the way we are wired and imposing that faulty programming on the children of the world.  Just a thought."

You mean by the myths of society that are inclusive to the laws and codes therein?

quote:

  "So, unless you can prove that, as you put it, the underlying aspects of the philosophy as a whole are illegal. I will be tossing in the towel on this now pulverized dead horse."

I never once indicated the entire Gorean philosophy was illegal-not once. Portions of the Gorean philosophy are though illegal, however those illegal portions are not negated out of the Gorean philosophy just because they would otherwise violate societies law or laws.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

Rapture,

I guess you missed my statement on your definition of philosophy... I will provide a snipet for your conveinance.

quote:

  Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source

philospohy

phi·los·o·phy       (fĭ-lŏs'ə-fē)  Pronunciation Key 
n.   pl. phi·los·o·phies

Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.

Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.

A system of thought based on or involving such inquiry: the philosophy of Hume.

The critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs.

The disciplines presented in university curriculums of science and the liberal arts, except medicine, law, and theology.

The discipline comprising logic, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and epistemology.

A set of ideas or beliefs relating to a particular field or activity; an underlying theory: an original philosophy of advertising.

A system of values by which one lives: has an unusual philosophy of life.

The rest of it can be found in the Customs and Philosophies thread, where you originally posted your definition.

quote:

  A short response... what are you comparing to, to determine if that if Customs and Philosophies (which are the same see the defination of the same at the end of this post).

"Ah but I didn't say incorrect, I asked for a part of the philosophy that was illegal.  You are asking me to prove a double negative which is a rather illogical thing to do."

As clearly defined below, I have pointed out in several instance porition of the Gorean philosophy that would otherwise violate the laws of society. You have not defined what philosophy or part thereof that you reference to maintain that the same does not violate societies law or laws (not being illegal). However, you do continue to maintain that the "philosophy" or "philosophies" do not without qualifing your contentions nor providing any example thereof that would otherwise contradict my contentions.

Asked and answered.

quote:

  However, you have not made the case that the above does not apply. As to what of the philosophy is legal then about the above? The only thing is the lack of the practice of it, which I do believe I have mentioned. I have further mentioned just because something within the confines of a stated philosophy is illegal does not negate said aspect from the philosophy, but merely makes the practice thereof illegal in the eyes of societies law.

If a particular act is illegal and part of a philosophy it does not negate that philosophy, I agree with this.  Your contention that any and all acts that can be committed by a man (simply because he is a man) makes it part and parcel of the Gorean philosophy, is where we differ.  Just so we are clear though,  I am simply a man, who is striving to live by and gain a better understanding of the philosophy, in my understanding I have some rituals, protocols, and even some codes.  If I happen to act outside of those codes for whatever reasons, does not mean that the philosophy is what supports those actions.  Most importantly those actions definitively do not become part of the philosophy.

quote:

  "The question then becomes were these people there as examples of the philosophy, or were there as window dressing to show how the other side of the coin looked.  See if you want to get literal, and look at each spot on the page, sometimes you miss the big picture while counting the dots per inch.  Take it in its entirety and adjust your blinders, any point that is made can be contradicted by another quote, it's kind of funny how they were written that way. "

Again, generalizations that are kept overly broad, ambigious, vague, and therefore intelligible so that said defination that you are purporting may exist. Again, are you comparing apples with apples, apples with pears, or applies with rhino's to substatitate your conclusion(s)?

"There are of course things beyond the code, laws, and "natural" behavior; people are funny that way.  When one goes against that natural wiring, is it any surprise that the body begins to reject it, even if they are conditioned to go against that nature?   We as a society wonder why there are so many medical problems?  Perhaps it is because we (the very broad general sense of the word) have stopped living by the way we are wired and imposing that faulty programming on the children of the world.  Just a thought."

You mean by the myths of society that are inclusive to the laws and codes therein?

As you enjoy stating, put the pieces together across the now 10 or 11 posts, the puzzle will be complete.  Asked and answered.

quote:

  "So, unless you can prove that, as you put it, the underlying aspects of the philosophy as a whole are illegal. I will be tossing in the towel on this now pulverized dead horse."

I never once indicated the entire Gorean philosophy was illegal-not once. Portions of the Gorean philosophy are though illegal, however those illegal portions are not negated out of the Gorean philosophy just because they would otherwise violate societies law or laws.

A bit general and broad, eh?  I asked in earlier posts for one tenet of the philosophy that was illegal, to which you did not provide an answer, except to say that I should prove that the entire philosophy was not illegal.  As pointed out in other places in this thread and others, there is a difference between a philosophy and the actions that are carried out by folks.  One may attempt to study and live by a given philosophy, but may not always achieve the ideal.  Some folks, even try to convince others that a philosophy is so broad that it includes bombings, murder, rape, pillaging as part of it, and that because they are now acceptible by fathwa (decree) they are now also part of the underlying philosophy. 

Feel free to disect this post with your (insert color) colored glasses, make whatever assumptions you wish, and feel free to post them here in public.  I have nothing to hide and if there is a negative view of me, so be it.  I will take your opinion with a grain of salt.  The endless arguing in circles is pointless and futile,  I for one am done with this topic, at least for now.  I know call it a hit and run, but if you remember I was ready to finish a few pages ago....

As always,
Thadius