Skip Navigation

Posts
116
Comments
167
Joined
2 yr. ago

Knowledge of morality, free of infallibility. I strive to learn and teach of the philosophy, logic, or value of our knowledge of love and hate, good or evil, right and wrong; born from how much more conscious we of ourselves and everything else in contrast to nature — of selfishness and selflessness. Though heavily inspired by Tolstoy's non-fiction, I find any source of humanities knowledge of morality worthy of consideration.

  • My point is, when the world is drowning in such people

    Are you saying the world is presently drowning in such people, or if it were to be drowning in such people?

    the problem is hardly that no-one has spread "the great principle" loudly or far-enough.

    It's hands down the biggest problem; knowledge needs to be gained so therefore, someone needs to be willing to teach it. Once upon a time the value of selflessness, love, and it's logic was no where near as assimilated within the hearts of men until people like Socrates or Jesus inspired others to even consider rising above what we would otherwise be more inherently drawn to if not for the knowledge of their influence: hate and selfishness.

    My mother, her mother, my step-mother, mother-in-law and my wife's aunts aren't "exceptionally bad saints", they are performing a role society has inculcated in people for generations. Even my wife seems to think self-care stops at hygeine, going to the gym and not letting her job get in the way of family events, and I had to beg her for years on the latter.

    Idk, obviously I can't say for sure but I'm getting the impression you may be over exaggerating due to your obvious bias.

    When you couldn't even "grasp" the content of my first comment

    I could grasp it just fine, but I wasn't clear on it as you write and explain things in a way that didn't make it easy to understand initially, so I wanted to make sure I knew exactly what you were talking about first before giving a response.

    I do things the "saints" in my live are afraid to do, both for safety and "what will people think of me?" reasons, like pick-up hitch-hikers, give money, food(upon request) and free rides to pan-handlers

    Ah, so it's ego that clouds your judgement. How do you know for a fact these people in particular you're referring to, who don't represent all the good hearted people everywhere as a whole, don't do anything like those you listed? Based on what evidence? Could arrogance and hate be leading you your assumptions to become fact without genuinely knowing for sure?

    its that they deserve better

    Who deserves better?

    never said altruism was bad, or that the people I've described are "the problem", but YOU are presumably not one of them.

    My post isn't about altruism at all. I'm sorry you got that impression. And the people you're referring to are the farthest thing from the epidemic you're dressing it up as.

    I never said altruism was bad

    I agree. But you definitely heavily implied it.

    Au contraire, yours is a message they love to listen-to, so wouldn't it be nice if you could sprinkle in a word about self-care and treating one's-self on occassion?

    Absolutely not. They get enough of that from the hypocrisy [the acting] of their contemporaries so it's a miracle they're even willing to be selfless to its extremes to begin with. Besides, to what degree are these people just really depressed? And you're not capable of seeing it due to your contempt for them and hate for the perspective I'm putting down. I'm not saying this for a fact, I'd obviously have no idea, just a suggestion. I would say however that in order to most efficiently love others, one must love themselves; the more one loves themself, the more effectively and more willing they are to love others. That said, I agree with the ancient Greeks: "Nothing too much (in excess)" - the second of three maxims chosen to be inscribed into the entrance of the temple of Apollo where the Oracle of Delphi resided in Ancient Greece.

    ... but no, let's go six comments-deep and spend dozens of paragraphs refuting anyone who does mention those things as if that person were preaching the word of Xenu or, shudders, prosperity gospel.

    Well to be fair the first two was me trying to make clear what you were initially trying to get across. And I'll go as many comments as you need, friend. It sounds frustrating and idk what it's like to have a family that's apparently selfless to the point where it becomes a problem. I'd agree with you on that by the way, altruism can go sour provided people who haven't been educated on the topic of selflessness get a hold of it. Or maybe these people are simply capable of seeing something you can't due to their experiences in life. Idk, that's what led me to the edge of selflessness myself, gaining the knowledge of the experience of the hate, evil, and selfishness that still flourishes throughout the world. Once you get a good taste of it for yourself it's tough to look away from the value and potential of the only cure: love and selflessness.

  • And don't forget Hinduism, Stoicism, Jainism, and Taoism; and I'm sure plenty others.

  • Philosophy @lemmy.ml

    𝑮𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒉𝒊'𝒔 "𝑺𝒖𝒄𝒄𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒇𝒖𝒍 𝑺𝒆𝒂𝒓𝒄𝒉 𝑭𝒐𝒓 𝑻𝒓𝒖𝒕𝒉 𝑴𝒆𝒂𝒏𝒔 𝑪𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆𝒕𝒆 𝑫𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒄𝒆 𝑭𝒓𝒐𝒎 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑫𝒖𝒂𝒍 𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒐𝒏𝒈 𝒐𝒇 𝑳𝒐𝒗𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑯𝒂𝒕𝒆"

  • "Saints" aren't people that drop everything and rely on the hard work of others to sustain them. I'm sorry to hear you have a bad experience with a handful of people that take pacifism and non-violence and apply this black and white kind of perspective on them. That is, to be a pacifist one must never, under any circumstances, ever use violence. Or to be selfless to its extremes one must forgo all their possessions and expect their contemporaries to pick up after them; to sustain them.

    One would only need to explain to these people that in a world where it's either sink or swim, but we choose to swim together to some degree via things like socialism because we realize swimming individually only leaves us vulnerable and ultimately, swimming together to ease the burden for everyone as a whole is simply more efficient because that way no one drowns or is left behind due to inabilities both physically and mentally that some people are simply born with or inherit from the world's hands getting a hold of them via trauma brought on from war or even social interactions.

    So don't blame the great principle just because imperfect people ever since don't fully understand it and become confused by people of the past and present that lead people to think it needs to be either or — violence or non-violence; selflessness to its extremes with zero room for selfishness, and that there's apparently no in between.

  • I think I see what you're saying. Do you have personal experience with this, if you don't mind me asking?

  • Counterpoint: How do you help a MISSERABLE self-less martyr? People that keep giving after they have nothing left to give and end-up dragging everyone around them down with their misery and good intentions?

    What do you mean here exactly? I'm not following. Do you mind explaining?

    When you grind an obvious point into infertile dirt, the obviousness of it does nothing to prevent it becoming such dirt.

    I'm sorry, again I'm not sure what you are saying. Do you mind clarifying?

  • Philosophy @lemmy.world

    𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝑺𝒂𝒍𝒕 𝑰𝒔 𝑺𝒆𝒍𝒇𝒍𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒏𝒆𝒔𝒔

  • Philosophy @lemmy.ml

    𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝑺𝒂𝒍𝒕 𝑰𝒔 𝑺𝒆𝒍𝒇𝒍𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒏𝒆𝒔𝒔

  • Philosophy @lemmy.ml

    𝑻𝒐𝒍𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒚'𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒔 𝒐𝒏 𝑸𝒖𝒊𝒅 𝑷𝒓𝒐 𝑸𝒖𝒐, 𝑫𝒆𝒂𝒕𝒉, 𝑱𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒔' 𝑺𝒖𝒑𝒑𝒐𝒔𝒆𝒅 𝑹𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 "𝑬𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒍" 𝒐𝒓 "𝑻𝒓𝒖𝒆" 𝑳𝒊𝒇𝒆 (𝑷𝒂𝒓𝒕 𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒆𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒆𝒆)

  • Philosophy @lemmy.world

    𝑻𝒐𝒍𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒚'𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒔 𝒐𝒏 𝑸𝒖𝒊𝒅 𝑷𝒓𝒐 𝑸𝒖𝒐, 𝑫𝒆𝒂𝒕𝒉, 𝑱𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒔' 𝑺𝒖𝒑𝒑𝒐𝒔𝒆𝒅 𝑹𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 "𝑬𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒍" 𝒐𝒓 "𝑻𝒓𝒖𝒆" 𝑳𝒊𝒇𝒆 (𝑷𝒂𝒓𝒕 𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒆𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒆𝒆)

  • Philosophy @lemmy.world

    𝑲𝒊𝒏𝒈'𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒔 𝒐𝒏 𝑷𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓

  • Philosophy @lemmy.ml

    𝑲𝒊𝒏𝒈'𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒔 𝒐𝒏 𝑷𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓

  • Philosophy @lemmy.world

    𝑻𝒐𝒍𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒚'𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒔 𝒐𝒏 𝑸𝒖𝒊𝒅 𝑷𝒓𝒐 𝑸𝒖𝒐, 𝑫𝒆𝒂𝒕𝒉, 𝑱𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒔' 𝑺𝒖𝒑𝒑𝒐𝒔𝒆𝒅 𝑹𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 "𝑬𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒍" 𝒐𝒓 "𝑻𝒓𝒖𝒆" 𝑳𝒊𝒇𝒆 (𝑷𝒂𝒓𝒕 𝑻𝒘𝒐 𝒐𝒇 𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒆𝒆)

  • Philosophy @lemmy.ml

    𝑻𝒐𝒍𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒚'𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒔 𝒐𝒏 𝑸𝒖𝒊𝒅 𝑷𝒓𝒐 𝑸𝒖𝒐, 𝑫𝒆𝒂𝒕𝒉, 𝑱𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒔' 𝑺𝒖𝒑𝒑𝒐𝒔𝒆𝒅 𝑹𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 "𝑬𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒍" 𝒐𝒓 "𝑻𝒓𝒖𝒆" 𝑳𝒊𝒇𝒆 (𝑷𝒂𝒓𝒕 𝑻𝒘𝒐 𝒐𝒇 𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒆𝒆)

  • I agree, well said. It's called religious pluralism.

    "Know thyself." - The first of three Ancient Greek maxims chosen to be inscribed into the Temple of Apollo where the Oracle of Delphi resided in Ancient Greece

  • Philosophy @lemmy.world

    𝑮𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒉𝒊'𝒔 "𝑨𝒄𝒒𝒖𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒄𝒆 𝑾𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝑹𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒈𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔"

  • Philosophy @lemmy.ml

    𝑮𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒉𝒊'𝒔 "𝑨𝒄𝒒𝒖𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒄𝒆 𝑾𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝑹𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒈𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔"

  • Why?

  • Philosophy @lemmy.world

    𝑻𝒐𝒍𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒚'𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒔 𝒐𝒏 𝑸𝒖𝒊𝒅 𝑷𝒓𝒐 𝑸𝒖𝒐, 𝑫𝒆𝒂𝒕𝒉, 𝑱𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒔' 𝑺𝒖𝒑𝒑𝒐𝒔𝒆𝒅 𝑹𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 "𝑬𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒍" 𝒐𝒓 "𝑻𝒓𝒖𝒆" 𝑳𝒊𝒇𝒆 (𝑷𝒂𝒓𝒕 𝑶𝒏𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒆𝒆)

  • Philosophy @lemmy.ml

    𝑻𝒐𝒍𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒚'𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒔 𝒐𝒏 𝑸𝒖𝒊𝒅 𝑷𝒓𝒐 𝑸𝒖𝒐, 𝑫𝒆𝒂𝒕𝒉, 𝑱𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒔' 𝑺𝒖𝒑𝒑𝒐𝒔𝒆𝒅 𝑹𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 "𝑬𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒍" 𝒐𝒓 "𝑻𝒓𝒖𝒆" 𝑳𝒊𝒇𝒆 (𝑷𝒂𝒓𝒕 𝑶𝒏𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒆𝒆)

  • Philosophy @lemmy.world

    𝑲𝒊𝒏𝒈'𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒔 𝒐𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑷𝒉𝒊𝒍𝒐𝒔𝒐𝒑𝒉𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝑷𝒂𝒄𝒊𝒇𝒊𝒔𝒎

  • Philosophy @lemmy.ml

    𝑲𝒊𝒏𝒈'𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒔 𝒐𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑷𝒉𝒊𝒍𝒐𝒔𝒐𝒑𝒉𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝑷𝒂𝒄𝒊𝒇𝒊𝒔𝒎

  • Tolstoy is saying much more here than simply "Desire is the root of dissatisfaction." And love, but defined more as our unique and profound capacity for selflessness, is the only desire incapable of dissatisfaction.

  • Philosophy @lemmy.world

    𝑻𝒐𝒍𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒚'𝒔 "𝑺𝒆𝒅𝒖𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝑷𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑾𝒆𝒂𝒍𝒕𝒉 𝑺𝒆𝒆𝒎 𝒂 𝑺𝒖𝒇𝒇𝒊𝒄𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝑨𝒊𝒎 𝑶𝒏𝒍𝒚 𝒔𝒐 𝑳𝒐𝒏𝒈 𝒂𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒆𝒚 𝑨𝒓𝒆 𝑼𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒕𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒆𝒅"

  • Philosophy @lemmy.ml

    𝑻𝒐𝒍𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒚'𝒔 "𝑺𝒆𝒅𝒖𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝑷𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑾𝒆𝒂𝒍𝒕𝒉 𝑺𝒆𝒆𝒎 𝒂 𝑺𝒖𝒇𝒇𝒊𝒄𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝑨𝒊𝒎 𝑶𝒏𝒍𝒚 𝒔𝒐 𝑳𝒐𝒏𝒈 𝒂𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒆𝒚 𝑨𝒓𝒆 𝑼𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒕𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒆𝒅"

  • Philosophy @lemmy.ml

    𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝑭𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝑪𝒉𝒂𝒑𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒐𝒇 𝑴𝒂𝒉𝒂𝒕𝒎𝒂 𝑮𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒉𝒊'𝒔 𝑨𝒖𝒕𝒐𝒃𝒊𝒐𝒈𝒓𝒂𝒑𝒉𝒚

  • Philosophy @lemmy.world

    𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝑭𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝑪𝒉𝒂𝒑𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒐𝒇 𝑴𝒂𝒉𝒂𝒕𝒎𝒂 𝑮𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒉𝒊'𝒔 𝑨𝒖𝒕𝒐𝒃𝒊𝒐𝒈𝒓𝒂𝒑𝒉𝒚

  • I'm sorry what?

    Edit: what do you mean?

  • Yes but to live how God would've wanted to save ourselves from the double edged sword that is to know anything on top of the knowledge of any knowing being good or evil. And the snake representing that vulnerability to arrogance when something as capable of knowledge is guided by blind arrogant humans as opposed to a God that represents truth, but the truth of selflessness in a way over any dogma; knowledge, thus, consciousness more specifically, where any potential of truth originates.

    "For kindness I desired [mercy, as Jesus specifies in 9:13], and not [animal] sacrifice, And a knowledge of God above burnt-offerings [external worship]." - Hosea 6:6

  • It doesn't matter if selflessness was something we lost, or if it is in God's plan.

    I'm not saying it was something we lost, or anything being in God's plan, what I'm saying—this post has nothing to do with either of what you're saying here.

    If God wants us to be selfless, why did he first create us to be ignorant of selflessness?

    Because knowledge needs to be gained, and what comes along with the knowledge of both selfishness and selflessness is our knowledge of death, that we would've otherwise have been blissfully unaware of. If the snake didn't introduced its influence via its arrogance, then they would've simply listened to God and that would've been that, everyone and everything lives happily ever after. But God not knowing something creeped it's way into knowing so much without its knowing, didn't allow it to happen therefore, it's something that again has the potential of happening to something capable of knowing so much that isn't being guided by God, which the snake obviously wasn't, and wouldn't anyway being so arrogant, so blissfully self-assured.

  • You point out we need to regain what we lost through God. We need to regain our selflessness.

    When did I make this claim/what are you gathering this from? I'm saying in order for either the individual or a collection of individuals to establish peace both within themselves and amongst themselves they would need to strive to become more ignorant of how aware they are of themselves. More specifically, what is right or wrong in relation to themselves, and replace that instinctive worry, need, or fear for themselves with the fear, worry, need for everything else.

    Had they passed by a fish out of water

    This wouldn't have been a thing in Eden to begin with, presumably. I don't equate Eden as a literal place and all of these literally happened so this is irrelevant to begin with.

    How do we get back our pre-fall selflessness if Adam and Eve didn't have it?

    Did you even read my post?

  • I quoted Jesus; arrogance is at the root of all the hate and evil in then world.

  • Wow thanks that's very nice of you. What's your group all about?

    What's said about knowing and not knowing is what I wish people would get. All these social ideological sects that are appearing in society is because people think THEY are the only correct ones. Political and theological groups can be some of the most egregious in this manner.

    Omg I could not agree more! That's what Socrates took his life trying to teach, and die a martyr to.

    People talk more than think. And usually think what others have talked to them about.

    Beautifully said! I think people like Jesus would've agreed, considering the extent he would call out the dogma of his day; promising to believe something as unquestionably true would be an example of an oath: "Do not take an oath at all." - Matt 5:34

  • Alright great.

    So what do you mean by "these places" exactly?

  • Any knowing is a knowledge. Our knowledge of time for example or even of the experience.

    Just because blind men have attached their words and beliefs unto Jesus' via the New Testament ever since, distorting the crap out of it 45 thousand different ways, that doesn't make it what Jesus was really trying to say. "Do not take an oath at all." - Matt 5:34; of course making the promise to believe things as unquestionably true cna be catorgorized as an oath.

  • Oh okay. Yeah you're right, it definitely needs plenty of work; think of my posts more as drafts rather then being a representation of something finished. I appreciate your thoughts, thanks!

  • I could not agree more. Have you considered his teaching in its purest form via the precepts of the Sermon On the Mount - Matt 5-7, but interpreted more objectively? Including and especially the one about oaths (promising to believe things as unquestionably true would be an example of taking an oath in my opinion); "do not take an oath at all." - Matt 5:34.

    I also noticed that what he meant by we humans being the salt of the earth and light of the world (Matt 5:13), he was pointing towards our unique and profound abilities for selflessness and knowledge in contrast to nature. Selflessness is the salt: Without humans on an earth (a conscious capable being on a planet), there's nothing to be as selfless as we're capable of being; the extent we can push past our instincts in favor of where knowledge takes us. And knowledge is the light: Without humans, there wouldn't be anything to give life to any knowledge (including of a God) to the degrees we can in contrast to nature, and be able to retain and transfer it (keep it living so to speak; "the living God" - Matt 16:16 ); not to mention anything with the ability to measure morality the same way we do our knowledge of time, and to act upon it and apply that knowing to our environment.

  • Are you referring to this post here regarding the book of Jonah?

  • What do you mean? Are you saying something similar regarding how Tolstoy equates the supernatural and miracles within religion? As a means for men mellieniums ago to express thought?