It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Would you suggest that if all 'occurrences of what you deem to be idealism' were to cease to exist tomorrow, there would be one unarguable method of how humans would function and exist from then on? (and lol, would that be the most ideal means of existence, one that is idealess?)
About 'society', you say it is ideal that we speak of how they should exist instead of how they do exist. But is it not true, that idealizing 'went into' how the society that exists now, exists? So we know the future will occur, we know society exists now exactly as it does, and because the inevitability of 'time', the way in which society exists now is always slightly changing, which over more and more time, offers more and more changes. Since we have the power to aid and shape change, we think and view society as it exists now, and say, how will it exist in the future, and what are the best ways to aid its change.
You say, we dont see things for what they are, but I will paraphrase and say, we see thing with personal biases, and that is ideal. I suppose I have lost your point a bit, and now think I remember your main argument was to 'philosophers' who use the term ideal and materialism to refer to 'good, wishful thinker' and 'evil capitalist pig'. And your argument is that this type of thought is wrong, because seeing and knowing material as it is...compels one to use it in novel material ways? And that is ideal?
If we didnt have personal relationships to materials, and see them for what they could be, we would still be monkeys right now. I suppose this is your argument to the spiritualists, who say materialism is bad, you are saying that they are asking to erase all human progression, they are asking to be monkeys.
Ok, well I thought you might have been arguing other things, my bad be well.
Some food for thought for the "real philosophers" that haven't even gotten around to explaining the most fundamental of questions, and to boot refuses to investigate the possibility with any amount of effort, besides taking a shallow look and proclaiming how reality functions. Laughable really.
No, that would be exoteric religion you speak of, mystics of all kind were the ones hunted by the church remember..
Mystics were largely behind the Enlightenment, so you can thank the idealists for that one.
As for your claims, I find them dubious.. there is no going back when realization is attained, you are a fraud. But then again, you did claim enlightenment in an earlier thread, a preposterous claim if there ever was one.. then you "grew tired of it".. yeah, I won't be drinking that Kool-Aid anytime soon.
The only way you would get rid of the "security blanket" in the first place would be if all you ever had was blind faith. Which would be funny, coming from you. Seems all you ever was was a dabbler, if you haven't found an iota of what you searched for. Yet you proclaim our experiences invalid for ourselves, we don't care about what you know.. you're a child using big words mentally masturbating.. you're understanding is still that of a petulant child, what you think you know is moot in the face of reality.
Oh, and I don't need waiting, I already know what I know, I'm waiting for science to free itself from dogmatic fundamentalists like yourself. If anything, you're running with the crowd partially responsible for holding mankind back, thanks for that champ, you're a tool and you don't even seem to know it, quite proud of it too.