Define God

[No Robots]

Only a limited few read philosophy. A lot f it is dense and intended for philosophers not average people.

This is a fair cop. Are there works of philosophy that are intended for average people? That is why I like Harry Waton. He presented philosophy in lectures at working people's organizations. He embraced the idea that philosophy is the spiritual weapon of the proletariat. I highly recommend his book, A True Monistic Philosophy, available at Hathi Trust. Another good one written at a similar level with a similar outlook is John Macmurray's The Clue to history, available at archive.org. With these two books, any average person can put themselves in the cat bird seat of philosophy.

 

[steve_bank]

spiritual weapon of the proletariat?

Man the barricades!!!



Got any Cuban cigars?

Many thought that Marxism was the people's weapon and it ended in oppressive regimes.

I'll go with western liberal democracy where people do have a say in the long run, however messy it can be. People freely voted out the left and elected Trump, as bad as it is. That;s power to the people for you.

Philosophy used to be a pass time for those with the the education and free tie to sit around in the afternoon talking about nothing....the Bourgeoisie.

I a retired and passing the time here to stay mentally active...do you have a day job?

As I recall you said you were looking for financial contributions for your ideology.

You sound like petite boogey-wha. Enough money to enjoy boogey pleasures like ice cream and wine.

The problem for the die hard Marxist is the extravagant amount of goods available to the masses at relatively low cost. Average people who fly to Hawaii for a vacation or Vegas for a weekend.

Marxism terms no longer apply.

 

[No Robots]

^You've made your philosophic choice.

 

[bilby]

Interpretation or theory is determined by observation and testing. Which appears to be a matter of science, not philosophy.

The choice to use observation and testing as our approach, rather than something else (for example, prayer, meditation and silent contemplation; or taking psychadelic drugs, in an effort to consult our spirit guide) is very much a matter of philosophy.

There is a distinction to be made between observation and testing which is scientific enquiry and philosophy as a rational enquiry into abstract concepts, the meaning of life, morality, ideology, etc. Empirical testing in contrast to rational exploration of ideas and concepts. There may be an overlap, but the two are not the same.

The overlap is 100%, but they are indeed "not the same". In the same way (and for the same reason) that 'red' is not the same as 'colour'.

Scientific enquiry is a subset of philosophy.

 

[steve_bank]

^You've made your philosophic choice.

I made a reasoned choice back in the 70s early 80s.

I did not want Marxism and western democracy free market capitalism was preferable even with all the negatives. I opposed communism.

What were once forms of Marxism which collapsed, Russia and China are now forms of free market capitalism. Why? Because it works. It brought China out of its collectivist misery and forced seismological equality.

As to unions it is not the 1920s. Unions have money and political influence, as corrupt as anything else.

A derail to social science.

So, what do do to put food on the table? Do you enjoy the basic boogey wha pleasures? French wine and cheese, and ice cream in the freezer? Take out food delivered 24/7? Music all day and night? Video?Concerts? Getng in a car and drvng anywhere you want any tie? Favorite retaurant? Cliotehs?

 

[lostone]

spiritual weapon of the proletariat?

Man the barricades!!!

View attachment 52231

Got any Cuban cigars?

Many thought that Marxism was the people's weapon and it ended in oppressive regimes.

I'll go with western liberal democracy where people do have a say in the long run, however messy it can be. People freely voted out the left and elected Trump, as bad as it is. That;s power to the people for you.

Philosophy used to be a pass time for those with the the education and free tie to sit around in the afternoon talking about nothing....the Bourgeoisie.

I a retired and passing the time here to stay mentally active...do you have a day job?

As I recall you said you were looking for financial contributions for your ideology.

You sound like petite boogey-wha. Enough money to enjoy boogey pleasures like ice cream and wine.

The problem for the die hard Marxist is the extravagant amount of goods available to the masses at relatively low cost. Average people who fly to Hawaii for a vacation or Vegas for a weekend.

Marxism terms no longer apply.

The problem with capitalism is that those luxuries that were once available to those 'average people' you cite are increasing out of reach to more and more people since the table has been tilted so decisively to the upper one per cent or so due to hard Right Wing policies that have dominated since the Reagan era. The lack of decent paying jobs. That leads to a lot of dissatisfaction. Marxism, as you say, may not be the solution, but capitalism seems to badly bruised and needs a few bandages.

 

[pood]

This thread has seriously drifted off topic

 

[pood]

View attachment 52231


Philosophy used to be a pass time for those with the the education and free tie to sit around in the afternoon talking about nothing....the Bourgeoisie.

Yeah, Plato, Aristotle, Hume, so many others, all boogy-wah, sitting around and talking about nothing. “Plato, pass the tea and crumpets please, and what were you saying about ideal forms? It is so INTERESTING!”

As it happens, Max Tegmark, a modern physicist, is also a mathematical Platonist.

 

[pood]

. It brought China out of its collectivist misery and forced seismological equality.

OMFG, are you serious??

Income INEQUALITY in China is greater than in the U.S.

Unregulated cowboy capitalism is worse than communism.

But again, this is off topic.

 

[pood]

^You've made your philosophic choice.

I made a reasoned choice back in the 70s early 80s.

I did not want Marxism and western democracy free market capitalism was preferable even with all the negatives. I opposed communism.

All philosophy, the very thing you say you disdain.

What makes you think the Soviet Union and Communist China of that era had anything to do with … Marxism?

 

[pood]

I live in NYC, the capitalist king of the world, notwithstanding its reputation for alleged liberal politics.

Every morning I step over people sleeping in the street.

Capitalism, baby!

 

[pood]

Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration

— A. Lincoln

 

[pood]

Marx on the civil war (Marx and Lincoln corresponded):

The way in which the North is waging the war is none other than might be expected of a bourgeois republic, where humbug has reigned supreme for so long. The South, an oligarchy, is better suited to the purpose, especially an oligarchy where all productive labour devolves on the niggers and where the 4 million 'white trash' are flibustiers by calling. For all that, I'm prepared to bet my life on it that these fellows will come off worst, 'Stonewall Jackson' notwithstanding. It is, of course, possible that some sort of revolution will occur beforehand in the North itself.

— Karl Marx

Up late and babbling online because illness has disrupted normal sleep patterns.

 

[steve_bank]

spiritual weapon of the proletariat?

Man the barricades!!!

View attachment 52231

Got any Cuban cigars?

Many thought that Marxism was the people's weapon and it ended in oppressive regimes.

I'll go with western liberal democracy where people do have a say in the long run, however messy it can be. People freely voted out the left and elected Trump, as bad as it is. That;s power to the people for you.

Philosophy used to be a pass time for those with the the education and free tie to sit around in the afternoon talking about nothing....the Bourgeoisie.

I a retired and passing the time here to stay mentally active...do you have a day job?

As I recall you said you were looking for financial contributions for your ideology.

You sound like petite boogey-wha. Enough money to enjoy boogey pleasures like ice cream and wine.

The problem for the die hard Marxist is the extravagant amount of goods available to the masses at relatively low cost. Average people who fly to Hawaii for a vacation or Vegas for a weekend.

Marxism terms no longer apply.

The problem with capitalism is that those luxuries that were once available to those 'average people' you cite are increasing out of reach to more and more people since the table has been tilted so decisively to the upper one per cent or so due to hard Right Wing policies that have dominated since the Reagan era. The lack of decent paying jobs. That leads to a lot of dissatisfaction. Marxism, as you say, may not be the solution, but capitalism seems to badly bruised and needs a few bandages.

Didn't say there are no problems and the system may fail. Trump's economics are dangerous.

I said Marxism and its derivatives all failed. China and Russia failed catastrophically. Famines caused ny ideology and unable to meet basic needs.

Many may not realize the scale and scope of a system of 400 million people like the USA.

It is easy to shake your fist, another to actually make it work.

This all is an experimenter. Providing for millions of people, freedom of speech and action for all, housing for all with electricity and water, food 24/7, education and medical care for all.

That it works at all is a miracle.

I have been saying for 20 years now the system is not sustainable as is and has to evolve. Capitalism is based on grwth and that requires a growing population.

Russia, China, and Japan are in trouble because of low birth rates. Little immigration.

Trump's policy expelling all illegals is crazy. At the same time he expects our manufacturing to grow,

Marxism and collectivism and central control of the economy is not the answer.

NR is another fringe element. He thinks the world will become Jewish and that will make things right.

 

[bilby]

Capitalism is based on grwth and that requires a growing population

No, it doesn't. Just growing GDP. Increasing population is one way to increase GDP (ceteris paribus), but far from the only one. It's perfectly possible to have rising GDP and falling population simultaneously.

Russia, China, and Japan are in trouble because of low birth rates.

Are you sure? It's pretty obvious that Russia would be in trouble regardless of population changes, and far from obvious that China or Japan are in trouble at all, although I guess that depends on what you mean by 'trouble'.

 

[steve_bank]

^You've made your philosophic choice.

I made a reasoned choice back in the 70s early 80s.

I did not want Marxism and western democracy free market capitalism was preferable even with all the negatives. I opposed communism.

All philosophy, the very thing you say you disdain.

What makes you think the Soviet Union and Communist China of that era had anything to do with … Marxism?

Again putting words in my mouth my ideological friend.

I have a problem with your ideological philosophy as I do with Chrtianity. Narrow minded.

In your philosophical mind what is the basis for this forum to exists and your having the free time to post and read philosophy?

Agricultural and manufacturing efficiency on a large scale. Goods and services creted by free market competition. The computer you use is the result of intense free market competition going back to the 70s. All driven by the profit incentive.

There are positives and negates to free market competition.

Try reading economics instead of dead philosophers.

 

[bilby]

The computer you use is the result of intense free market military industrial competition going back to the 70s WWII, and accelerated through the Cold War All driven by the profit incentive fear, both justified and otherwise.

FTFY.

Free markets have never really been tried, on any great scale, because they are unsuited to such government endeavours as warfighting and strategic support of local production.

If you try to operate free markets, you discover that all your jobs go to places where people are happy to work for a few cents a day; Or that your local workforce has to become happy with working for a few cents a day. And when you need to fight a war, you discover that the only factory that makes some critical component, and/or the only workers with the skills to make a vital tool, that your army cannot fight without, is in an enemy country.

So nobody does it. Of course, politicians like the idea, so they go around telling everyone that they do it. But they don't.

 

[pood]

^You've made your philosophic choice.

I made a reasoned choice back in the 70s early 80s.

I did not want Marxism and western democracy free market capitalism was preferable even with all the negatives. I opposed communism.

All philosophy, the very thing you say you disdain.

What makes you think the Soviet Union and Communist China of that era had anything to do with … Marxism?

Again putting words in my mouth my ideological friend.

I have a problem with your ideological philosophy as I do with Chrtianity. Narrow minded.

In your philosophical mind what is the basis for this forum to exists and your having the free time to post and read philosophy?

Agricultural and manufacturing efficiency on a large scale. Goods and services creted by free market competition. The computer you use is the result of intense free market competition going back to the 70s. All driven by the profit incentive.

There are positives and negates to free market competition.

Try reading economics instead of dead philosophers.

Of course, what I asked was, and you did not answer was … What makes you think the Soviet Union and Communist China of that era had anything to do with … Marxism?

 

[pood]

The Marx/Engels idea was that the state would “wither away.” Did the state noticeably wither away in Soviet Russia or Communist China?

 

[lostone]

Marx had some good ideas, some interesting ideas, some ideas that were not so good, and some ideas that were flat out wrong. The idea that the state would wither away was one his ideas that was simply a badly mistaken conclusion.