User Tag List

First 101819202122 Last

Results 191 to 200 of 216

  1. #191
    Wonderer Samuel De Mazarin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Plato's republic was run by philosopher kings. Yes. The vulgar were expected to do as they said without question.

    However, the difference here is. We will do everything our power to encourage all to think autonomously. We will force them to do so if necessary, to whatever degree they are capable of thinking for themselves they will, or starve.

    This is the opposite of Plato's ambitions.

    ....

    He gave up on the endeavor to inspire the philistines to think for themselves. Plato decided that it is best that there be a rigid code of behavior imposed upon them in order to ensure that they stay out of our way.
    You're right... Plato was far more merciful to those who didn't think like him. He proposed that those who were made of 'baser metals' be allowed to live their lives within the confines of general societal guidelines. He didn't leave them to die.

    For your system to work, better you create your own commune and build it up into a model nation-state than try to impose your ideas on any existing polities. Everyone, even the pure mathematicians, would revolt.
    Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.

    Realize us, Madman!

    I razed a slum, Amen.

    ...............................................

  2. #192
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    You keep saying this as if other people don't also think they have a rational foundation for their value judgments. I think you, like everyone else, may not realize when you are too close to a topic to be truly objective about it. To my eye, one limb of a policy of objectivity is recognizing when you're not capable of it.
    Yeah well, we have a VERY rigid formula for deciding what is objective and what isn't. No room for moosh there. I earnestly think that it is ridiculous to claim that most people DO have objective reasons for standing by their values, as this presupposes that they are skilled logicians.


    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    You're right... Plato was far more merciful to those who didn't think like him. He proposed that those who were made of 'baser metals' be allowed to live their lives within the confines of general societal guidelines. He didn't leave them to die.

    For your system to work, better you create your own commune and build it up into a model nation-state than try to impose your ideas on any existing polities. Everyone, even the pure mathematicians, would revolt.
    Plato did not give any liberty to the vulgar. He imposed a very rigid code of behavior on them.

    In our case everyone will be allowed to do as they please as long as they have a sound argument for doing so.

    This leaves room for much more leeway than the rigid code of behavior, no need for revolt here.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  3. #193
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Yeah well, we have a VERY rigid formula for deciding what is objective and what isn't. No room for moosh there. I earnestly think that it is ridiculous to claim that most people DO have objective reasons for standing by their values, as this presupposes that they are skilled logicians.
    Okay. Why should I believe you have the skills to be so objective?
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  4. #194
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Okay. Why should I believe you have the skills to be so objective?
    Hey, I have an idea: Let's use feeling to decide what is objective?

    Muhahahhahhahahha!

    (Sorry, had to say it - now I am normal again).
    If you are interested in language, words, linguistics, or foreign languages, check out my blog and read, post, and/or share.

  5. #195
    Senior Member miked277's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    343

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Okay. Why should I believe you have the skills to be so objective?
    the ole' bluewing defense, "i'm right because i'm me and you're wrong because you're you!"

  6. #196
    Wonderer Samuel De Mazarin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Plato did not give any liberty to the vulgar. He imposed a very rigid code of behavior on them.

    In our case everyone will be allowed to do as they please as long as they have a sound argument for doing so.

    This leaves room for much more leeway than the rigid code of behavior, no need for revolt here.
    Well, this is (my fault) but Plato's Socrates at the very least incorporated human passions into his consideration of the 'ideal' city-state. People cut out for war would go to war, those who were of a more capitalist disposition would conduct their trade in the agora.

    In your vision, you would have an entirely cleansed city, a city cleansed of the passions, which is impossible... what I was saying is that Plato had more sense to include what you presume to summarily exclude.

    Even if one disagrees with Plato, his position is more moderate than yours, which advocates the perfunctory dismissal of all elements without your demanding qualifications... Plato seeks, in whatever flawed way, to incorporate them into the city-state, since all of these people are necessary.

    And Plato did allow for relative freedom within certain moral boundaries. Of course there were moral codes, but generally wine and sex were not entirely outlawed, but to be restrained. Only when the common folk stepped out of bounds would a rehabilitative process ensue... what you propose is to just kick everyone out, since most people would leave your city-state.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    The strongest principle is that everybody, whether they are male or female, should have a leader. Likewise, no one should get into the habit of doing anything at all on his own initiative-either in earnest or in jest. Both in war and during time of peace, he should respect his leader and follow him faithfully. He should look up to his leader and follow his guidance in even the smallest matters. For example, he should get up, move around, wash, and have his meals.. only at such times as he has been ordered to do so. In other words, he should get into the habit, by a long process of training of never dreaming of acting independently, and thus becoming utterly incapable of such action. In this way the life of all is spent in total community. There is no law, and there never will be one, which is above this. It is the most effective way of achieving salvation and victory in war. And in peacetime, and from earliest childhood, this should remain the highest law- the need to rule others and be ruled by others. All trace of independence or anarchistic spirit must be completely eradicated from the life of all men, and even the wild beasts which are kept by these men.---Plato, Laws
    I should add, before you or anyone else responds to this post, that I have all the while been talking about Plato's Republic, not Plato's Laws or even Plato himself. This started with my characterizing your (BW's) vision as being much like Plato's republic and I eventually concluded that your vision is in fact even less realistic than his (in the Republic) was... regardless... the validity of your arguments doesn't rest on its consonance or dissonance with any of Plato's books, I was making an observation which, I think, generally holds true...

    you propose that a group of 'high-minded' individuals runs everything... much like Plato's Republic... with all those who don't obey being cast to the wolves... not like Plato's Republic.

    I was generally fixated on the more abstract issues regarding the role of Feeling in rational debate and didn't really bother to read through the first few posts... now that I've done some due diligence, I still stand by my defense of BW's right to argue without being verbally assaulted, but I also recognize why people got so offended....
    Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.

    Realize us, Madman!

    I razed a slum, Amen.

    ...............................................

  7. #197
    Senior Member miked277's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    343

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    I still stand by my defense of BW's right to argue without being verbally assaulted, but I also recognize why people got so offended....
    i don't think anyone wants to shut bluewing up, so to speak, but as long as i've been a member here and at intpc he's been creating threads like this. while he does indeed make valuable contributions to this and other sites his contributions are at least equaled by his ability to arouse the general dislike of most. the cause is twofold, first he carries around an air of arrogance and immaturity. second, his arguments are infact built on some very faulty logic (in this case and others, not all)... full of non sequiturs, false dichotimites and the like. just an overall feeling i have regarding his arguments is that they are built on top of a *very* small foundation of actual experience and/or research.

    my suggestion to him is to do *a lot* more investigation into not only the subjects which are touched on in your arguments but also on subjects which might seem tangental but infact are intricately related. a small example of how one might go wrong in this respect goes as follows... someone could be the foremost expert on the earth, it's geography, biology, topography, etc *but* if they are completely ignorant of anything outside the earth (ie. the sun, moon, other planets, the universe, astrophysics) and they try to make postulations on why the earth rotates or revolves, how it was formed, what is it's ultimate destiny then they simply don't have the data to do any of that accurately and furthermore attempts to do so will appear downright foolish.

    anyways, that's my 2c. i was going to write up a long response to the OP (and i started to) but i'll just leave it at this for now.

  8. #198
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by miked277 View Post
    i don't think anyone wants to shut bluewing up, so to speak,
    To be fair, I've implicitly called for banning him. I've describe him as an unusually elloquent troll and flamer, and I've said that we've already seen everything he has to contribute.

    So, Samuel was talking about people like me.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  9. #199
    Senior Member miked277's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    343

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    To be fair, I've implicitly called for banning him. I've describe him as an unusually elloquent troll and flamer, and I've said that we've already seen everything he has to contribute.

    So, Samuel was talking about people like me.
    ah, gotcha.

    but yeah, i don't think banning is the best course of action in this case. bluewing does have redeeming qualities. his more abrasive qualities i suppose are just part and parcel and can be curbed by say, moving threads like this to a section labeled "flame bait" or "useless but funny." his threads having prime space in the main sections of the site are in effect partially legitimizing what he has to say. that combined with his unusually elloquent style sort of reinforce how much weight people give to what he says. if, however, this type of his stuff were explicitly labeled as "trash" or "flame bait" then i don't think people would find his ramblings so offensive or take him so seriously.

    that's what i think at least.

  10. #200
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    Well, this is (my fault) but Plato's Socrates at the very least incorporated human passions into his consideration of the 'ideal' city-state. People cut out for war would go to war, those who were of a more capitalist disposition would conduct their trade in the agora.

    In your vision, you would have an entirely cleansed city, a city cleansed of the passions, which is impossible... what I was saying is that Plato had more sense to include what you presume to summarily exclude.

    Even if one disagrees with Plato, his position is more moderate than yours, which advocates the perfunctory dismissal of all elements without your demanding qualifications... Plato seeks, in whatever flawed way, to incorporate them into the city-state, since all of these people are necessary.

    And Plato did allow for relative freedom within certain moral boundaries. Of course there were moral codes, but generally wine and sex were not entirely outlawed, but to be restrained. Only when the common folk stepped out of bounds would a rehabilitative process ensue... what you propose is to just kick everyone out, since most people would leave your city-state.



    I should add, before you or anyone else responds to this post, that I have all the while been talking about Plato's Republic, not Plato's Laws or even Plato himself. This started with my characterizing your (BW's) vision as being much like Plato's republic and I eventually concluded that your vision is in fact even less realistic than his (in the Republic) was... regardless... the validity of your arguments doesn't rest on its consonance or dissonance with any of Plato's books, I was making an observation which, I think, generally holds true...

    you propose that a group of 'high-minded' individuals runs everything... much like Plato's Republic... with all those who don't obey being cast to the wolves... not like Plato's Republic.

    I was generally fixated on the more abstract issues regarding the role of Feeling in rational debate and didn't really bother to read through the first few posts... now that I've done some due diligence, I still stand by my defense of BW's right to argue without being verbally assaulted, but I also recognize why people got so offended....

    I am confused.

    Summarize in 3 sentences what 'moderate' means and how Plato's view is more moderate than mine.

    Unlike Plato I do not argue for aristocracy. But Democracy instead. Plato insisted on aristocracy because he recognized the need to make decisions rationally but only thought the intellectual elite were capable of rational decision-making. I insist that all become competent at rational decision-making.

    Plato is the one who robs them out of the right of voice because they are plain stupid, despite that he involves them in his plans that you mention. I insist that they should not be left out, but as prerequisite for this, they must learn to think for themselves.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

Similar Threads

  1. Thinking/Feeling and Mercy
    By Asterion in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 12-31-2011, 04:58 PM
  2. What personality type do you think he has?
    By Tish211 in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-05-2011, 06:32 AM
  3. [INTP] I think Feelings are important. And I'm an INTP
    By Cypocalypse in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 02-19-2009, 04:44 PM
  4. Thinking/Feeling game: Same Difference
    By rivercrow in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-14-2007, 08:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO