The Philosophical Condition/Method

As I read Player's posts I start to wonder why he sounds like an arrogant philosophy text book and not a real person.... Reborn Again is right tone down your words, not everyone is quite as smart as you think you are.

So in lamen terms:

1) Enivornment ultimately affects our development
2) Monkey see monkey do
3) Knowledge is obtained through interaction of the status quo
4) Our perception of ourselves can change over time even though set variables have been established

Am I correct?

Yes, I do believe you're correct in analyzing his post.

As I read Player's posts I start to wonder why he sounds like an arrogant philosophy text book and not a real person.... Reborn Again is right tone down your words, not everyone is quite as smart as you think you are.

This works two ways. If you are using a word correctly and in it's proper context, then it's up to others to understand and comprehend what you are saying. I believe that using the proper words for the proper meanings is a sign of intelligence, and I respect someone with a great vocabulary.

Then of course there's the flipside. Some people complicate and purposefully "fog" the meaning of what they are trying to say using intellectual mumbo-jumbo and smoke & mirrors. These people believe that what they have to say is very important and only people who can sort out their convoluted thought process is entitled to their ultimate knowledge.

That being said, philo, I don't ask you to "dumb down" your ideas, I just ask you to express yourself more clearly and in a accurate manner.

Originally posted by Player
The philosophical conditions of breeding a new philosophy can be defined as follows:

1. The Observation condition.
2. The Absorption into the Abstraction condition.
3. The Judgement condition - from Analytic to Synthetic.
4. The Alteration or Destruction condition towards a novel theory.

The above are the core steps in formulating an original philosophy and we can go into more detailed discussion in each condition.

Observation is a recoil of the self-aware being against its environment. It observes in a capacity of high sensitivity and intensity, as its interest is naturally arrested by its suroundings. Intellectual appetite is the mother of this level of observation.

Absorption is essentially a condition of the observing agent simulating its thought constructs with external constructs, from there the condition of Abstraction follows, which is a mental image of the external entities in an interpretational preparation.

Judgement is the logical consequence of the previous condition: an opinion or perspective is formed via the analytical (axiomatic definition and and commonly denoted relationship (neccesity) between an entity and its properties) into the synthetical realm of subjectivity and interpretation, in which the latter can undermine the analytical in its extreme application.

Finally a position of either Alteration of an existing theory or the complete negation of accepted status quo towards an original philosophy.

Any comments on my above theory would be appreciated

Too long and too confusing.JMconfused1

Well if an intellectual giant like Jackie can't follow that we are all doomed!

Jackie, there's a lot more 'long' philosophical texts out there. But yes, I find it a bit confusing too...maybe I'll have to read it 100 times over.

People here likes to pick on jackie... 😬

Originally posted by Misty Girl
Jackie, there's a lot more 'long' philosophical texts out there. But yes, I find it a bit confusing too...maybe I'll have to read it 100 times over.

I find that difficult to believe being as you wrote it! Enough with the socks!

Originally posted by peterKSL
People here likes to pick on jackie... erm

Because she makes it so damn easy. It's not that people "like" to pick on her, it's just that she so often says such absurd or unintelligible things that people are "compelled" to comment.

Let me make this clear: I did not ask Player to "dumb" down his language as he puts it. I asked him to tone it down. There's a big difference. I never said I didn't understand it. I'm saying there's a lot of fancy words in there that the average person reading this thread would not understand.

Although I share your desire for people to speak with clarity Reborn, I also believe that if a word is used in it's proper context, then no matter how vague it is, it is fine. It is up to the reader to get a dictionary and figure it out themselves.

But like I say, some people do convolute and idea to make themselves seem smarter than they are.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Although I share your desire for people to speak with clarity Reborn, I also believe that if a word is used in it's proper context, then no matter how vague it is, it is fine. It is up to the reader to get a dictionary and figure it out themselves.

But like I say, some people do convolute and idea to make themselves seem smarter than they are.

True. But using too many fancy words can confound and confuse the reader into saying, "Screw this! I'm not reading anymore!" When you're reading something, you don't want to reach for a dictionary to look up a word every two seconds. Reading an article is like getting into a warm bath: you don't want to think about what you're reading half the time, you instead want to enjoy the meaning.

We're gonna have to agree to disagree here.

But using too many fancy words can confound and confuse the reader into saying,

Originally posted by finti
in this particular case it probably confused the writer more

Now aint that the truth! 😆

The philosophical condition!? wtf! I think philosophy is taken too seriously by so-called philosophers. They discuss subjects that for all practical purposes never manifest as reality - we experience life much more simplistic than what philosophers like to think. Ultimately we live a day to day life which for the most part is about physical survival, pain and pleasure - we don't think so high browed all the time about ideas hanging around like clouds - we simply live for a while and then it all comes to an end.

yeah pseudo intellectuals are a biatch

they are very unoriginal

and not nearly as smart as they think they are

...

Yeah, normal people teaches one a lot more than reading smoky philosophy texts.

philosophy is a waste of time and space ..............