WHAT BAD ACADEMIC PHILOSOPHERS DO…. Listened to a roundtable of Philosophers f

WHAT BAD ACADEMIC PHILOSOPHERS DO….

Listened to a roundtable of Philosophers from The New School discuss the questions “what is philosophy” and “is it relevant”, and was … exasperated.

There were four basic themes to their (Marxist) discourse:

1) the did not seem to grasp the spectrum of ‘comparative’ or perhaps ‘calculative’ methods, and simply referred to different disciplines instead of the properties that these methods include and test, and exclude and do not test.

2) They do not understand that most of what they are saying are mere word games: they start with a term and try to define it’s meaning, rather than start with a problem and solve it, or start with a term and see what it CAN ONLY mean.

3) As Marxists they are desperately trying to create a verbal religion wich will provide either the skepticism or authority of religion in order to avoid the obvious evidence of Darwinian necessity.

4) They were trapped into the fallacy of seeking the ‘truth’ while at the same time seeking to construct a lie, and of course this is the reason for their intellectual struggle.

There was only one philosopher (Cornell West) who I would find interesting to debate, because he seeks to avoid the truth in order to find peace in inferiority. I have compassion for this problem. But I solve it through trade which costs, but does not create conflict, not through denial and deceit which costs because it creates conflict. The Buddhists and Stoics’s solved this underclass problem of acceptance through behavioral modification. The stoics truthfully and the Buddhists … I guess pseudoscientifically or pre-scientifically if that’s possible. The Hindus created a history-mythology which is impenetrable to the rest of us. Everyone in the three ‘books’ religions just lied about it, so that they could pretend to solve it.

(Wrote something wonderful … and fb ate it. I swear I’m going to intentionally install my own keylogger so that there is always some record of my scribblings.)

PHILOSOPHY: (quick sketch) Transcendence.

PERSONAL(epistemology). Avoid false knowledge. Discover useful (~true) knowledge. By the use of reason. Using Methods of Reason: narrative(communication), rational(comparison), rationalism(non-contradiction), logic(internal consistency), cooperation(ethical consistency), physics (empirical and operational consistency), testimonialism (truth). This provides us with Personal Transcendence: The Hero’s Journey. Philosophy can be performed in fantasy narrative, in historical narrative, in rational and logical (set) argument, in empirical, and in testimonial terms. But throughout we are Loading, Unloading, Imagining, Comparing, Valuing, and Deciding. All that differs is our skill in each method, and whether we wish to influence (loading-empath), deceive (obscurantism, suggestion), or persuade (truth-objectivity).

POLITICAL (cooperation)

Avoid error and deception, discover utility and truth. Using the methods of reason, and the methods of argument:

Group Transcendence via persuasion.

PHYSICAL (physics)

Transformation via action:

AESTHETIC (biological)

The Goal of Transformation.

The Useful(actionable), True(Ethical), The Moral(Good), The Beautiful(Bounty/Fertility/Content/Perfection)