Comments on: twitter philosophy

By: Lies and Truth, Epistemology and Semiotics, to Know Mugi is to know God (Yuri-ka!), The Quixotic Quest of Language; and OH YES Eureka 7 « We Remember Love

Wed, 20 May 2009 02:21:51 +0000

[...] I had to post all of this on twitter, as some philosophy is done, it would take over 80 tweets to do [...]

By: ghostlightning

ghostlightning — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 01:55:15 +0000

Where’s the mistake? This orgy of intellectual frottage is glorious!

Think of it as something like a renga writing exercise, only with HOT BLOOD but without the inebriation. YOUR MOVE!

By: lelangir

lelangir — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 20:25:37 +0000

No. I played basquash with it!

By: OGT

OGT — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 02:34:17 +0000

OKAY GUYS YOU CAN CALM DOWN NOW

Jesus, I was just giving my horribly generalized, vague, non-specific holistic impressions of the general thought patterns that seem to be pervasive more in one loosely-defined culture than another. You were SUPPOSED to sit down and evaluate how the two viewpoints (which I ascribed to West and East since they seem to fit more with those cultures, although apparently I shouldn’t have) affect how you watch anime/read books/whatever. Do you want it to be better than it is, and judge by that, or are you happy with what it is?

It wasn’t about how Hegel defined perfection versus how Siddhartha Gautama defined it. I pitched a baseball and you guys played cricket with it.

I won’t make this mistake again, I think.

By: moritheil

moritheil — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:26 +0000

Anyway, this is (obviously, I thought, but perhaps not obviously) about the Buddhist assertion that one cannot let the construct intended to guide one to truths about existence be a bar to discovering truths about existence. Relevant to the above discussion of thought-constructs trapping people.

By: Kaiserpingvin

Kaiserpingvin — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 02:00:56 +0000

Just as the colour and shape of a ladder does not change whether you can reach an apple at the top, there might be different ways for perfection to be incarnate.

I mean, say, even if you’re omnipotent, you can have a prelidiction for using it in different ways. Yahveh divides oceans , the Aeon just floats there and lets part of it try to save Sophia from the work of the Demiurg, Azathoth listens to New Age music and Beatrice cackles.

In technical terms: instead of property P being perfection, there may be P1, P2, … Pi perfection properties.

By: ghostlightning

ghostlightning — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 07:18:20 +0000

if one is not the best of all possible things, can one/that thing still be perfect?

By: Kaiserpingvin

Kaiserpingvin — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 00:13:54 +0000

All this assumes there’s only ONE perfection tho.

One might well imagine that there are several ways in which one may be able to be perfect (fulfill all criteria for a certain measurement of excellence, or something).

By: moritheil

moritheil — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 20:03:29 +0000

I am simultaneously reminded of the Black Lagoon drunken discussion of Jesus’s choice of armament (“What did the shepherd carry as he walked through the valley of death?” “He’s a Jew; he has to have an Israeli pistol!”) and the fact that supposedly there is a manga retelling of the Bible.

Well done . . . I think. :P

By: ghostlightning

ghostlightning — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 01:44:20 +0000

An interesting paradox lurks somewhere within this discourse. Something along how entropy is a big part of dynamism, and how dynamism is not a quality of perfection which has no reason to move, or be anything else than it already is.

By: ghostlightning

ghostlightning — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 01:40:10 +0000

“…using a large beam weapon.”

FIXED.

By: moritheil

moritheil — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:19:47 +0000

“If you meet the Buddha in the path, kill him.”