Confucius

@Ron C de Weijze,

Ron C. de Weijze wrote:

I'd rather say, I appreciate anyone's tradition developed independently, for those are the only ones that can validate (independently confirm or deny) mine so that I know what I can rely on.

How can a tradition be validated, confirmed, or denied?!

They are what they are.

You know what to rely on by striving for authenticity -- by self-criticism, reflection, and reconsideration. Only then do you know if you really believe what you think you do.

@Aedes,

Aedes, a tradition becomes one, in my book, by being independently confirmed in different peoples' opinions. When I believe I have found some truth and you can confirm that independently (as per by my self-criticism, reflection and reconsideration), then that truth becomes laden with more truth-value, so that I (and you) can more easily believe it and more rapidly apply it in proper circumstances. These circumstances will tend to become a tradition.

@Ron C de Weijze,

Ron C. de Weijze wrote:

Aedes, a tradition becomes one, in my book, by being independently confirmed in different peoples' opinions.

A tradition is what someone does, not what someone believes. Many people traditionally say "god bless you" when someone sneezes. We traditionally shake hands using our right hand. We traditionally celebrate birthdays.

We can believe something about these traditions, but you don't believe or confirm the tradition itself. That's why what you're saying doesn't make sense to me.

If what you're really trying to say is that comparing traditions can confirm one as superior or inferior to another, I find that fairly elitist as it ignores the different needs that other people are entitled to have, and how those needs are fulfilled by their practices and beliefs.

@Aedes,

Belief is not aboutness. If you believe, then act. Although some classes in this world can permit themselves not to keep up their word but just their worthy appearances, preferably intercultural, so that any true reasons/agenda's may have their impact in spite of all the politeness and diplomacy.

@Ron C de Weijze,

Ron C. de Weijze wrote:

some classes in this world can permit themselves not to keep up their word but just their worthy appearances, preferably intercultural, so that any true reasons/agenda's may have their impact in spite of all the politeness and diplomacy.

And some have such respect for the autonomy of others, such genuine interest in others' beliefs, and such sincere concern for the marginalization of minority views, that their "word" is synonymous with their "worthy appearance". That's what multiculturalism is -- not some stereotype.

@Aedes,

I am happy to assess that the Leftists multicultural experiment, at least in the Netherlands, finally after 30+ years, has failed. The party that was and is mainly responsible, has diminished so far, that now finally in their own countrywide newspaper they are begging for less criticism from their own voters. Even in that debate there is at most 1 out of 10 defending the case.

@Ron C de Weijze,

Ron C. de Weijze wrote:

I am happy to assess that the Leftists multicultural experiment, at least in the Netherlands, finally after 30+ years, has failed.

Why does failure make you happy?

@Aedes,

Would you have joined the party in May 1945?

@Ron C de Weijze,

Not exactly sure whatleftist propoganda has to do with learning. By tradition in phil, I'm not so sure we are talking about political or cultural tradition as much as applicable method in thinking.

@Ron C de Weijze,

Ron C. de Weijze wrote:

Would you have joined the party in May 1945?

My grandparents were liberated from Bergen-Belsen, Dachau, and Salzwedel in April and May of 1945 after stints in Auschwitz-Birkenau, and after a death march in one case. The only party my family joined after that date is generally remembered (in politically correct terms) as displaced persons camps.

So perhaps you'll understand if I'm a bit bitter about conservative views from "old Europe" that celebrate a time of cultural exclusion and condescension to minorities. My family has borne the brunt of a lot more than forum rhetoric.

And it should be no shock that the political correctness you so malign was Europe's reaction to its own profound shame about what it had done to itself.

@Aedes,

--post deleted--

@Aedes,

Aedes wrote:

My grandparents were liberated from Bergen-Belsen, Dachau, and Salzwedel in April and May of 1945 after stints in Auschwitz-Birkenau, and after a death march in one case. The only party my family joined after that date is generally remembered (in politically correct terms) as displaced persons camps.

I would like to express my sympathies. My own family history is filled with some of the same misery. My grandmother on my mothers side comes from a family of gypsies. My grandfather on my fathers side fought in the kriegsmarine during WWII. I suppose you can imagine that not everything was easy to be spoken of. In my opinion the only thing that has a positive effect on the situation (in my family, in reflecting and in judging) is acceptating and forgiving.

Quote:

So perhaps you'll understand if I'm a bit bitter about conservative views from "old Europe" that celebrate a time of cultural exclusion and condescension to minorities. My family has borne the brunt of a lot more than forum rhetoric.

It does not happen often, but I would like to second this remark and I would like to express my hopes that if indeed such sentiments are held one might keep them to themselves for they are only important in applied ethical discussions and if indeed such a discussion would arise, we could argue any point of seperation in the sense that it draws a ficticious line in a limitless reality and thereby condemn it to the realm of fantasy.

Quote:

And it should be no shock that the political correctness you so malign was Europe's reaction to its own profound shame about what it had done to itself.

Ron C. de Niet-zo-Wijze, would you be so kind as to get back on topic and leave any ethical (in the wide sense) considerations to yourself?

@Aedes,

Aedes, I can understand your deep concern. Believe me I want to fight the same demon. I was a Leftist myself but became troubled over time, seeing what these people were capable of, especially while studying social psychology. There is no benefit left for them, not even of the doubt. Of course I am biased myself, however that was a conscious choice when I was faced with no alternative. Let's just keep searching for root causes before we turn our ideas into dogmatic ideologies.

@Arjen,

Arjen, apparently you know better, so I will unsubscribe from this thread.

@Ron C de Weijze,

Ron C. de Weijze wrote:

Getting caught up and blinders are not the same as being inspired by and enlightenment. If you want to become Chinese, then by all means study Confucius. Division is different from differentiation and analysis after integration and synthesis where one must be so humble as to know one's own place in the scheme of things (cultural history).

:disappointed:

Confucious was the topic and we've sort of strayed off a bit. There are good things to learn about all areas of philosophy and one doesn't have to be of Eastern decent to look at Eastern philosophy.

There's both good and bad, both negative and positive in all things. Take the meat off the bone and leave the bone. There's truly is something to be learned from all mankind. The only division is the division we've placed upon ourselves and our fellow man. There's one source.

Let's keep this on topic and set cultural differences aside.

@Justin,

Quote:

There are good things to learn about all areas of philosophy and one doesn't have to be of Eastern decent to look at Eastern philosophy.

That's the thing, isn't it? We revere great thinkers, not necessarily because we agree with a given thinker, but because we see the contribution of the thinker to the whole world's ongoing dialog about human life.

How else does an ardent theist appreciate the work of Nietzsche who claimed that god was dead? Obviously, the theist disagrees with Nietzsche, but even in the disagreement, the fact that Nietzsche eloquently, and with his own unique genius, expresses something relevant to the human condition, to his personal condition and to the condition of his time cannot be ignored - not as some screaming lunatic who's cries cannot be ignored for being so loud and absurd, but as an expression of human life that even the theist can relate to. How many of the great theistic thinkers felt the despair of uncontrollable doubt about God?

Quote:

There's both good and bad, both negative and positive in all things. Take the meat off the bone and leave the bone. There's truly is something to be learned from all mankind. The only division is the division we've placed upon ourselves and our fellow man. There's one source.

And when you've stripped all the bones clean, then you break in for the marrow. Read until your eyes bleed, grab a towel, and read some more. Study. If you boil the bone long enough, it crumbles and the marrow is easy to extract - and that's the most nutritious part, the marrow.

@Didymos Thomas,

Can we really even consider Confucius a philosopher? I fail to see how Confucius is any different for the East from say...Hesiod or Homer for the West. Certainly the Homeric and Hesiodic works contain moral/social teaching, praising, for example bravery, strength, etc. But we can scarcely consider Homer or Hesiod "philosophers."

I think the major thing that stands in the way of Confucius being able to be considered a philosopher is that philosophy is for a very great part "defined," so to speak, by the use of rational argument...and, let's face it, Confucius isn't exactly reknowned for rational argument as say...I don't know, Parmenides might have been.

Whatever the case, I'm going to make a stronger statement: Confucius and the Eastern "philosophers" are absolutely irrelevent to us Westerners, and I'd argue to absolutely anyone. They were absolutely non-influential in raising the major (even perrenial) philosophical themes (ontology, axiology, and epistemology), and were entirely irrelevent with respect to the development of our own philosophical history.

St. Augustine, Descartes, and Plotinus simply did not have Confuscius in mind, if you know what I mean.

I'll go further: Confucius can't even touch Marcus Aurelius. :nonooo:

@Bonaventurian,

I think your focus on the "rational argument" is a western bias.
In fact, the whole posts seems to amount to "oh, well, Confucius is eastern and not western, and therefore irrelevant".

How can you dismiss eastern philosophy so easily, especially when your only premise is that western and eastern philosophy are, in some respects, different?

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas wrote:

I think your focus on the "rational argument" is a western bias.
In fact, the whole posts seems to amount to "oh, well, Confucius is eastern and not western, and therefore irrelevant".

How can you dismiss eastern philosophy so easily, especially when your only premise is that western and eastern philosophy are, in some respects, different?

I guess my dismissal comes from my idea of what philosophy is. The term "philosophy" doesn't show up until Socrates. Philosophy is, literally, a love of wisdom. That love of wisdom, furthermore, must have a method.

That's what differentiates Hesiod from Plato, right?

What's Confucius' method?

Even with the Existentialists, we find the use of a real sort of rationality, especially with Kierkegaard...and to some degree, even with Heidegger.

@Didymos Thomas,

I think the problem with nearly all of Western philosophy is the lack of what makes Eastern philosophy distinctly eastern. The former based on logic the latter based on intuition. To me "the love of wisdom" probably has more to do with intuition rather than logic. Sure logic gives structure, but intuition guides.

Not to mention, why does love of wisdom need a method? Does love of another person also require a method?

Philosophy Forum

Quick Links

My Account

able2know