Category Archives: Philosophy

Truth or Trust

Posted on by
Reply

My belief is: If I can’t explain it, I don’t really understand it. Philosophy is a vague term that means the study of basics wisdom. Basics can go off into numerous branches of studies so I want to avoid the branches at first and start at the trunk with  generalizations.

I see two areas of philosophical study: the pragmatic and the speculative. The study of destinations is based in speculations. Religion and science try to delve into these issues. Why are we here? How did it all start? Where will we go? Since no one can time travel back or has an eternal body that can travel to the afterlife and back to ask questions, the majority of these studies don’t have conclusions that can be verified. What you believe in these area is less based in truth and more based in trusting the source. It is funny to me when factions debate these topics and ridicule each other since there is no data accurate enough to base one’s feelings of superiority.

Pragmatic philosophy tries to answer two questions: What goes wrong with individual humans and what is the best route to happiness for the same. There are written accounts of history for the social aspect and numerous studies of the in-depth psyche of the individual to draw from. Some of these studies are amazingly accurate and others a bit vague or off-based. But we can examine collectively how they apply to our time. Religion and science both have contributions to this area. Good conclusions can be formed philosophically that take the best points from every discipline. The studies only get complicated when we speculate on circumstances and motives. These two variables are usually where people get stuck.

A person has to decide if they have information that can be defended and if it is worth their time to do so. Discussions about destinations are based in faith. Pragmatic discussions are based in experience and knowledge. Either one can be enjoyable if done in the right spirit.

Causes

Posted on by
3

I had a conversation with someone the other day and he was reading an in depth philosophical that mentioned Aristotle’s teachings on the four causes. It is an interesting and important study. A site I like to use for study is the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html.There is quite a bit of reference material on this site. The ancient teachings are explained objectively and in a way that is understandable. I tend to over-simplify things in an attempt to make an easy read so this is a good place to go for if you want to go a little more in depth.

The four causes have to do with acquiring knowledge, especially as it concerns studying natural things. By causes we mean views or questions. One thing we are accustomed to look at is the material cause. What is the object is made of? A tree is made of wood, people are made of flesh. Another thing to look at is its form. How is it shaped? Trees have branches people have arms and legs. “Where did it come from?” is another question. Trees come from seeds and people come from the womb of other people; this is the efficient cause. What is it’s purpose? Trees provide shelter and nutrition for animals; people pursue happiness. This is the final cause. This gives the four causes: the material, the formal, the efficient and the final. They don’t have to be in any particular order.

Aristotle’s contribution the other philosophies of his day was the addition of a final cause or to use a big word, a teleological explanation. This makes the claim that most things are produced under an idea. The closer it comes to the true intention of the idea the more it becomes Ideal. If a person has a work of art, it starts in their mind and they see a final product. Once they have the idea, they will get the materials out and make a form such as a painting. The closer the painting comes to their idea the better and the final outcome is good. The idea is the driving force. When studying nature we can say that a seed has the idea of a tree built into it. Once it acquires material from the soil and takes on a form, the idea is recognized. And then there is the ideal healthy and intelligent person.

He suggested only going in depth as far as necessary to gain the proper knowledge. When studying natural things there is no need to reach into the speculative realm of origins. In organic chemistry, rather than using conjecture to explain a theory of origins for an enzyme, it is more important to look at the organ that secretes it, what it’s function is, what the enzyme is made of and its chemical composition. The digression into conjecture before looking into reality is a waste of time and a distraction. In what way will the enzyme serve its best purpose? What is the ideal amount? Trying to trace psychological or physiological things back to apes is also a waste of time since we see the ideal, humans beget humans so we only need to start at a present life and examine what is amiss.

This approach works when examining a business, politics or any organization. What are they trying to accomplish and where did it start? These are the final and efficient causes. Then you look at the individuals and the structure of the organization which are the material and formal causes. Apply this to anything you want to accomplish. Look at the goal, where to start, what you need and how you will accomplish it. You see the pattern of the final, the efficient, the material and the formal. Sometimes we get stuck on the goal or the dream but never start. Sometimes we have a good plan but lack the resources. It is that way in artistic expression too. What is it you want out of life? What is it you want to know? They both follow a pattern of causes.

Civilization

Posted on by
Reply

It is a part of human nature to look for ways to get as much benefit as possible with the least amount of effort. This a good trait that motivates us to improve our quality of life. The trouble is that many use this as an excuse to plunder others. Rather than going through the trouble of learning, self discipline and innovation, it is easier to take what belongs to another. People have been struggling for centuries to find a way to form societies where those who are willing to pass through the fire can keep what they have earned and those who are unwilling can at least have their daily needs met. This is no easy task.

With primitive tribal systems, nature is the taskmaster. The tribe will starve if people aren’t willing to hunt and gather. Some tribes became warrior nations so they could easily plunder others if they were lacking anything. Most were nomadic so they could move on to better areas if nature wasn’t cooperating by supplying their needs. This required large areas, had little incentive for improvement and wrecked havoc on the surrounding civil societies. In Europe, there were Vikings, Mongols and others that hadn’t formed civil societies and were known for plundering others.

In a civil society, the goal is to allow people to use their talents and passions without having others pilfer what they have accomplished. The protections come about once the people have taken control. They assemble and agree upon laws. In order to have protection for private ownership and to have a say in governing, requirements have to be in place for citizenship. This is so violent or non-violent nomadic people who should be using their own resources to succeed, cannot come in and pilfer what the citizens have accomplished through their common sacrifices. There are always citizens who are down in their luck and may have lost everything. Most civil societies have programs in place to help them. Those interested in plunder will always characterize themselves as such. That is why nations have legal processes in place to make sure those who come in are non-violent and are not coming in for a life of plunder but one of productivity.

Much of what is going on today concerning immigration is more of a money making scheme by smugglers who act like travel agents. They make millions by convincing others they need to relocate. These same people make promises that the destination nations cannot keep. Yet the travelers are taught from their youth to resent the nations they are convinced to relocate to. The proper way to improve their lot is to stand up for themselves and ask for help from others. Unfortunately it is popular to call civil nations that try to help those who want become civil, colonialists. This rhetoric is used by those who benefit from these oppressive societies. But if a people find it difficult to establish a civil society, there is nothing wrong with asking assistance from the countries they want to copy. Everyone benefits when they stay put and become successful in the areas they are established.

Emulate or Confiscate

Posted on by
Reply

Every person wants to live a good life with a certain degree of success in the areas they are passionate about. Self interest isn’t a diabolical motive. Rather than frustrating ourselves trying to navigate through politics, lets take time to look at common principles that we all can agree on. The best way to pursue happiness is through hard work and exhibiting good character. When a people of good character see others succeed, they will want to emulate what these successful people are doing with the hope of having the same degree of success. A good society will consist of people who are good at making voluntary deals with each other so all those involved can improve their lives. This is what it means to be just.

We naturally want to expedite the process of acquiring wealth and success. This is where things can go wrong. There are those who make a good living off inspiring others. They do it by pointing to the known principle of emulating good behaviors. This is the good side of helping others. But there is a diabolical side to inspiration, a shortcut side. It is based in envy and confiscation rather than good character and hard work. The leaders of these movements develop envy and entitlement in their followers rather than admiration and incentive. First they divide people into classes such as unbelievers and true believers, rich and the poor or black and white. After this, resentments are stoked through exaggerating the faults of the opposing classes. Finally, conclusions are drawn that others don’t deserve what they have and something must be done to confiscate it. This mindset forms the basis for every war.

The good news is that it doesn’t take political, community or religious leaders to cause us to work hard, exhibit good character and to have a degree of satisfaction in our lives. It is a personal choice. Every person is capable of making improvements within their own realm of influence with the time they possess. While the merchants of discord do their best to form resentments, those who have good character are enjoying their lives by emulating successful practices and being a good example to others.

Opinionated

Posted on by
Reply

People sometimes claim that things are a matter of opinion.  Opinions and statements can always be examined for accuracy by comparing them to facts. They are only true when they align with objects and the actual things about them that are being observed. The characteristics of these real objects are the only things that are subject to variations. Opinions and statements can only be true or false since they are mere expressions of the facts about certain objects that have been observed at a particular time. A person may have a different perspective due to their proximity, but their interpretation of the situation will still only be capable of being true or false.

A story is often told about blind men touching an elephant with each one giving different opinions of what an elephant is like. Although they may have conflicted opinions, these opinions still will not change the observation by everyone else that the object they touched was in fact an elephant. To claim a person is lying breaks into the realm of motives. It is better to focus on opinions as they relate to facts. A person who values truth will adjust their opinions to follow the facts if errors in their observations are pointed out.

Keep in mind that motives belonging to individuals are a personal thing that only those who are close to them will know with any certainty. There can be a wide range of opinions when speculating about motives and yet accurate statements can still be made about the actions themselves.  A news reporter who is objective will state their observations only and maybe interview eyewitnesses who are hopefully doing the same. When opinions about motives are inserted with the observations, it taints the entire account with loose speculation and the accuracy of the entire account must be put into question. This causes an audience to have a difficult time sorting things out while trying to get the real picture. These principle are true in all our conversations.

Real objects contain the variables we seek to accurately describe when working outside of fiction. Opinions and statements when presented to us are only capable of two characteristics, being true or false. It is good to have a well developed ability to sort out loose accounts from accurate ones. A diligent person won’t join the lazy bandwagon of “that’s just an opinion”, but will seek to understand the truth in a matter while laying aside loose speculations.

Love and Respect

Posted on by
Reply

The love and respect people have for each other is what makes a country great. A way we preserve this is to make a pact among ourselves. The pact that covers a large group or a country is called a constitution. This is similar to the pact called marriage that two people make. The purpose of a constitution is to keep the love alive. When a person says they love their country, they are referring to their fellow citizens. In the same way a ring is a symbol of marriage, a flag is a symbol of the relationship between citizens of a country. This is why it is respected and honored; it symbolizes respect and honor for fellow citizens.

Each person has their own passions. The things they are interested in, long for, and care about vary widely. We should never despise others if they have a different view. We are fellow citizens after all, under a pact, with the same goal to acquire happiness and fulfill our dreams. But since hatred, division and violence easily arouse passions, things that get the most hits make the most advertising money. This is a paradox of our information age. What a group of people care about shouldn’t be forced on others with shame and legislation. If we have a high regard for our fellow citizens, we will also have confidence they can work things out among themselves.

A constitutional government uses authority to protect the constitution from corruption and protect the citizens from attacks from inside and outside forces. All forms of government are susceptible to corruption from those who want to force their passions on others. It doesn’t make a difference if it is a monarchy or a democracy, in the end popular opinion keeps tyrants in power. Rhetoric is the art of persuasion. It doesn’t have to be sincere and the subject can be driven by bad motives. A demagogue is someone who uses rhetoric to incite a mob or a community. This can lead to passion rule rather than constitutional rule. When personalities become loved and respected over and above the citizens of a country, tyranny results. Again, the form of government doesn’t matter. A despot is one who came in under the pretense of being a common citizen with a job to do who becomes obsessed with making a name for himself at the expense of the good of his country. Demagogues use rhetoric to vet one group against another. They also consider constitutions an obstacle to their will. Forming factions is what they specialize in but they will call it organizing to make it seem less harsh.They will despise patriotism, flags or any symbol of the love citizens have for each other.

When a country has a kind of love and respect for each other that is working to fulfill their dreams, they will want to export this to other countries. This used to be called colonialism. Sometimes the common people of these countries who want to have this common love of country will have to be defended. When a country sends money and ideas, part of the bargain is that they are to be respected and can freely come and go to check on their investments. Since a demagogue owes his existence to vetting groups against another, anyone who has this love of country and those who desire to help others to share in these principles will be despised. When wealth isn’t being shared responsibly and results aren’t demanded, the sharing only enables tyrants. This causes uprisings and immigration problems since people will want to live where love and respect exists among citizens along with the safeguard of having an enforced constitution that seals it.