Philosophy and Me

[williamphilosophy-blog]

It is a breif description about the Buddha (non-religious) view on our "I" with a few situations showing as an example.

[williamphilosophy-blog]

Should we have government in business?

Key issue of the government is how much they should have a role in business. Ideas vary from nothing at all to complete control. I think that 'animal spirits' should be monitor which means minor government role but for the most part business have free rein. Listening to a good audio book at the moment which is called, "Animal Spirits: How Human Psychology Drives the Economy, and Why It Matters for Global Capitalism" heads up it does have bad audio though. Here for a some reasons I believe in some government control. 1) Health Safety     Before government could montior for such reasons business like meat packing where just horrible for health. It was really made public by a book called "The Jungle". I would like to know if I go to buy ground meat there is no rat meat in it. 2) Business desicion is more then logic     Audio book I mention earlier does a good job explanning it but I want to add one little detail. In William Irvine's "On Desire: Why We Want What We Want" shows how desire plays a gaint role on everyday life. He mentions a mental disorder which they lack desire. One was asked to have a visit monday or tuesday which he had a impressive talk for an hour which one to pick (and not getting closer to actual picking one). Then he was told just to come on monday, which Irvine then talks about how must of our desicions on base on desires. I mean every desires not just sexual so including ones like wanting to go for a walk.    

[williamphilosophy-blog]

[williamphilosophy-blog]

"We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools."

Martin Luther King Jr

[williamphilosophy-blog]

Stotics and Act

Ever since I started with philosophy, the Stotics have been my focus. With a combination with psychology I have read recently a book called "The Happiness Trap" which has helped alot also (which is ACT). The two are so similar it would be werid not to combine both them. So before making a connection here is a breif description of both of them. -- Stotics is base on a simple idea that we should live naturally. So how can we live naturally? Do we act like beast? The one thing that seperates us from beast is rationally so we should live like a rationally creature. To be rationally creature we must be in the right mind. We can't be driven by desire like lust or to be depress which will make us less rationally. The only thing that we then can depend is our mind but how do we support our mind? The stotics focus on virture and philosophy which supplies the rationally, then devopled certain techiques (which forms a life style) to help us keep ourself sane. -- ACT is a physchology techique that focus on using Eastern techiques like mindfullness to help endure our emotions so we can focus on our values. In a sense it is Eastern techiques put in a Western way. It is depends on our brain having two major parts which are the Thinking mind and the Observing mind. The thinking mind is what we are used to which is like the radio in your head that you keep hearing your thoughts. The Observing mind says nothing but only observes. ACT helps you endure your Thinking mind when it comes to negative thoughts. -- Combing the two is simple since all you have to do is use Stotic basic values and just add ACT techiques to help you be rationally creature. Be working well for me so far. ACT comes really useful at stressful points definely at work which Stotic has help me behave more like a rationally creature.

[williamphilosophy-blog]

Beyond Words?

A odd part of most eastern culture is that an explanation of the universe and way of life can't be describe by words only though a enlightenment is this possible. First book I have read showing this idea is Tao Te Ching (literally translation; the book of the Tao) is an great example. This idea carries in other eastern culture like Zen Buddhism, but has also been accepted somewhat by some western culture..

Starting with the formation of our universe is the first major problem you would encounter. Various problems can't be determined by pure lab research like what makes up everything or if the mind exist (different from a brain which is physical). Though it is impossible to be 100% sure it is still able to explain in it words. Which is why in a sense we can describe the Tao but can never truly know.

The true problem comes with ethics which has solutions like golden mean which good is the middle ground (similar to Buddhism). In a sense it is describe in worlds but it is the mere outline. I believe this is what beyond words means that we can outline it but never describe it completely.

[williamphilosophy-blog]

Epictetus Poem

Woke up on the floor

The pain throbbing in my head

Bottles on the floor

Forgetting what I have read

Epictetus must to be disappointed 

---------------------------

Can we decide our future

Our start is decide at birth

Leaving me in torture

Destroying my worth

Leaving me with a handicap

---------------------------

If given free will would I improve?

The passion to improve myself

The past was give no reason to want to move

Emotions was left me to be their elf

Slave to my mind

---------------------------

If my desires control my fate

Should I destroy them?

Destroying my action rate

Should I replace them?

Then with what?

---------------------------

Epictetus keeps calling

Always there to offer his advice

I can get my better future rolling

Against every vice

To replace them with virtue

[williamphilosophy-blog]

ROBOTS OR DINOSAURS?

Robots hands down but having a T-rex as a mount would be amazing.

[williamphilosophy-blog]

Friedrich Nietzsche and the modern Christians

Currently reading philosophers though-out time which my current one is Friedrich Nietzsche which I simply brought a cheap collection of eight books for the kindle. The first one is anti-christ which was odd at first but two points change that for me. First the suffering vs sin and secondly that the hatred was for the new church. When looking up where this division started, something interesting came up. When Jesus died his apostles formed a church called Judaism Christianity which died off quickly and the Christianity we know now in days formed after this church died off. So thinking I came up with a list I would hate what some modern Christians do/believe. Warning I am not a christian so if you think my reasoning for any of the points is off please comment.

1) Support Rich Tax Cuts: Idealy this would violate treat others like you would want to be treated. Since these people can afford it easily but force more taxes on lower classes which hurts them. If they where lower classes they would mostly likely want the rich to pay taxes so they have more moeny. Secondly it would show a vice of greed (if they are getting tax cuts).

2) Ban Gay Marriage: Lets start off with I know a gay marriage is sinful but there are two main rules that you break by doing this. First you break forget others for their sins which is why Jesus allowed himself to die on the cross (which defeats the whole purpose really of Christianity). Secondly like the first one you break treat others how you want to be treated (or better know as Treat your neighbor like yourself). Since you want to get married to the person you want to so therefore you have to allow the same for them.