Mystics. Take my word for it.

a reply to: Visitor2012

Only seekers create philosophies and Philosophers are glorified seekers.

Um.
No.
Philosophies are different approaches to philosophy.
And what do you mean by "Seekers"?
Seems to me by the normal definition of the word that would include scientists.
Well, those not just out to prove their points of view.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

A settled or established opinion, belief, or principle: the classic dogma of objectivity in scientific observation. Synonyms: conviction, certainty

This is to be avoided, some of the most terrible acts in history have been committed by people completely certain they are right.

I'm going to just omit the next paragraph and my response...........
For the sake of civility.
But I will ask.
I thought you said it was rubbish?

This actually supports what I'm saying. I never said that treating a belief or 'certainty' as if it was a fact led to good outcomes.

Given the conversation he was said to be having.
Personally, on a small side note, I lean towards the idea Socrates was just another allegory Plato used that became popular.
The problem here is context, as it is with a lot of quotes.
Which is why certain people believe Plato's allegorical Atlantis existed.
They leave the context of a conversation about ideal societies out or don't know the full context.

Excellent, so let's stop pasting quotes from other people, especially interpretations of other quotes, and just speak for ourselves. We don't need ancient old re-scrubbed and diluted words to discuss something that is right here, right now.
Let's cut to the chase while we're at it by putting you front and center. Let's consider the statement that no one can know anything with absolute certainty. now that being the premise, what then DO you know? Other than the fact that you perceive yourself to exist, which isn't knowledge but a simple observation. What else beyond that do you know?
Socrates answered that question for everyone.

If you're trying to find out what the universe is, or what you are, and decades of thinking and life experiences has not brought the search to a conclusion nor furnished a permanent answer, then you have no knowledge at all. At least no knowledge worth sharing with others. Survival knowledge yes, knowledge about how to operate in the world, yes. But knowledge of self and existence? no. Socrates didn't say anything profound here, his words came from simple observation and common sense, which is within everyone's capacity to realize within themselves.

a reply to: Visitor2012

Ah, you finally gave in to the urge to make it about me.......
I had hoped that earlier edit was based on a opinion you'd keep.
Pity.

But, to answer your question, I'll hint by reposting what I've already said.

Believing is what humans do.
Not knowing.

If you want to get right down to it.
All knowledge really means is justified true belief.
All you have to do is look at how much has been considered "knowledge" or "fact" at some point only to be cast aside.

The answer to your question really is all there.
Particularly when you put it together with what I've already said.
If you bother to look.

Again, what do you mean by "seeker"?

I'm a mystery, not a mystic. I'm sure many people wonder how a nut learned to type.

a reply to: rickymouse

"It could grip it by the husk!"

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

A seeker is anyone attempting to understand themselves and/or their environment be it the body, mind, spirit, the universe or whatever. Yes, that would include scientists, those on spiritual or religious paths, philosophers, anyone trying to gain knowledge and understanding about life and existence.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

You're right, I missed what you said there. So it looks like you're saying you know nothing but beliefs. If that's so, then I have no quarrel with that statement. Because it seems like exactly what Socrates said in his own way.

So the answer to my question to you is. I know nothing at all. Am I understanding your words as you've intended?

a reply to: Visitor2012

Then that would be everybody and nobody.
Or if I could put it better, all of us to one degree or another.

But we are all attached, to varying degrees, to our paradigms.




a reply to: Visitor2012

More or less.
I could bury you in minutae.
But I shall not.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Then that would be everybody and nobody. Or if I could put it better, all of us to one degree or another. But we are all attached, to varying degrees, to our paradigms.

That's not true. People who have found/recognized what they were looking for (for absolute absurd lack of better words) aren't seeking and they aren't operating under any kind of paradigm or thought-ruled structure.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Ah, you finally gave in to the urge to make it about me.......

I'd much rather talk about you or me (two LIVING beings) then some guy who died hundreds of years ago and what we think he said and meant. Boring..

a reply to: Visitor2012

Think they found what they're looking for you mean.

Let me clarify what I meant.
Can you prove to me that right now I am not some mad god in a void imagining this existence?
That I'm not hooked into some computer or perhaps even just a program in a computer?

Or, can you even prove your existence to me?
That you're not, say, a Tyler Durden to the commentator in my head?

a reply to: Visitor2012

Then please excuse my reluctance to do that.
All too often it's just someone seeking an avenue of attack.

And I would disagree, their words and thoughts are insanely important.
Those words helped shape the world.

In a manner of speaking.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Let me clarify what I meant. Can you prove to me that right now I am not some mad god in a void imagining this existence? That I'm not hooked into some computer or perhaps even just a program in a computer? Or, can you even prove your existence to me?

More importantly, can you prove any of it to your self?

a reply to: Visitor2012

Oh so you get where I am going with this?

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Think they found what they're looking for you mean.

Did Siddhartha Buddha think he found what he was looking for?

..that's a rhetorical question of course..

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Visitor2012

Oh so you get where I am going with this?

Where?

A mess.

a reply to: Visitor2012

The historical person who serves as the basis of the stories?
Who knows.

Not you or I.
Or really anyone alive today.
Unless vampires or some other immortal things that could've lived then exists.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Thank you for your absolutely breathtaking contribution.
Will that be all?

a reply to: Visitor2012


If you cannot prove even those very basic things beyond a shadow of a doubt.
How can you prove anything else?

Sure, you could toss the questions out as nonsense and so in your view avoid them.
But you'll be deluding yourself.