Philosophy

[GrayMouser]

Now, that's a philosopher

One of the last of the many legendary contests won by the British philosopher A. J. Ayer was his encounter with Mike Tyson in 1987. As related by Ben Rogers in ''A. J. Ayer: A Life,'' Ayer -- small, frail, slight as a sparrow and then 77 years old -- was entertaining a group of models at a New York party when a girl ran in screaming that her friend was being assaulted in a bedroom. The parties involved turned out to be Tyson and Naomi Campbell. ''Do you know who . . . I am?'' Tyson asked in disbelief when Ayer urged him to desist: ''I'm the heavyweight champion of the world.'' ''And I am the former Wykeham professor of logic,'' Ayer answered politely. ''We are both pre-eminent in our field. I suggest that we talk about this like rational men.''

So they did, while Campbell slipped away.

http://www.nytimes.com/books/00/12/24/reviews/

[Mari]

Hehe, very nice! I can't access your link though.

[GrayMouser]

Oooops, try this:

http://www.nytimes.com/books/00/12/2...24spurlit.html
The Wickedest Man in Oxford

Which also tells you how it happens that a 77-year-old logical positivist was entertaining a bevy of New York models.

[Mari]

Nope, still can't access

[GrayMouser]

Hmmm, works for me- what message do you get?

[Mari]

I need to log in... I used to have an account for the online Times, but that's years ago. It seems that it isn't valid anymore, I tried. I could try to subscribe again, but...

[hectorberlioz]

Jimmy Carter is insane.

Originally Posted by American Spectator

APPROPRIATELY ENOUGH, to Carter's mind, the biggest trade-off of the Crucifixion may have been gaining eternal salvation while losing a potentially great bureaucratic overlord. During a meditation on the temptation of Christ, Carter muses over the attractiveness of Satan's offer to allow Christ to rule the world if he rejected God:

What a wonderful and benevolent government Jesus could have set up. How exemplary justice would have been. Maybe there would have been Habitat projects all over Israel for anyone who needed a home. And the proud, the rich, and the powerful could not have dominated their fellow citizens…As a twentieth-century governor and president I would have had a perfect pattern to follow. I could have pointed to the Bible and told other government leaders, "This is what Jesus did 2000 years ago in government. Why don't we do the same?"

[Mari]

I don't understand half of what I read, but I think that what I understood implies that this Carter has a few ideas that are not really compatibility with my own views on religion. He raises an interesting point though: what would the world have looked like if Jesus had chosen to relate to Satan rather then to God. Not that it does us any good to think of it, because Jesus would never have, but I doubt that it would have been conform Carters ideas.
Which reminds me: shouldn't this be in the Theology thread rather then in the Philosophy one?

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Jimmy Carter is insane.

Honestly, hector, this stuff confuses me. I get that the guy hates Carter. That, I get. But his attack on the man's religious views is completely misleading.

Carter says, 'Some Christian denominations focus on material things instead of service." Well, some do. Prayer lists can be full of that stuff, depending on the church. And the history of the last 2000 years has featured some pretty tough arguments between Christians about that.

Carter says, "The temptation of Christ was, most centrally, the temptation to 'do good"." The same is true (and for good reason) of the temptation of Gandalf. "The way to my heart is through pity, pity for the weak and the desire to do good" (This is my paraphrase from memory).

The spin on this is dreadful.

[Insidious Rex]

As a twentieth-century governor and president I would have had a perfect pattern to follow. I could have pointed to the Bible and told other government leaders, "This is what Jesus did 2000 years ago in government. Why don't we do the same?

Funny. This is exactly the same way George Bush opperates.

[inked]

IR, you have misunderstood Jesus, Carter and Bush in a single thought. Congratulations on a new level of incomprehension.

Jimmy is having a bit of trouble with his Bible. George is having trouble with his.
Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world." And he resisted efforts to make him such on more than one occasion. Of course, the folks only wanted him to be king to give them food, as he told them. He further stated they should work for the bread that was kingdom bread and not merely food. You see how far that got.

[GrayMouser]

Anybody got a link to the original Carter quote?

[brownjenkins]

Nothing like a good loaf of bread!

[Gwaimir Windgem]

With a nice, triple cream brie, and some juicy olives or strawberries on the side, and a bottle of nice red wine to wash it all down? Mmm.....I want a picnic....

[Bombadillo]

I've got a good FDR quote on the philosophy of college students: "Now would be a good time for a beer." As he signed the bill to partially repeal prohibition.

*stretches* Ah! *sighs* *sits* *cracks knuckles*

The old philosophy thread. Er, the new philosophy thread. But it's OK. To merge them at this point would put us right near 500 post anyway huh.

You know what seems like the most urgent issue in the world to me? It's the life work of Jean Piaget, a Swiss developmental psychologist, who found that only one third of the entire world ever reaches the capacity to reason abstractly. IOW you're right! Most people are stupid! It's a fact that's been proven time and time again.*

Anybody familiar with Piaget here? Awesome. But he should be a household name. Here's his "Stage Theory" of psychosocial development, in a nutshell.
Stage 1 - Sensorimotor Period - In infancy, we experience the world primarily through feeling things, staring at things, listening and smelling things, and putting things in our mouths.
Stage 2 - Preoperational Period - Toddlers begin to understand the world around them, but barely. Watching them talk to one another is listening to two separate yet face-to-face conversations at once.
Stage 3 - Operational Period - When we develop a better handle on our universe. We can be taught math, and can eyeball liquid volume in variously shaped containers. We become less cute.
Stage 4 - Abstract Operations - We graduate to the philosopher class. When faced with new information, we judge its credibility and quality before tucking it into our memory banks. We combine learning with insight, and understanding with wisdom. Critical and independent thinking are the landmarks of this stage.

The surveys have been repeated and repeated for decades on large and small scales. The results are in: Only one third of humanity ever reaches Stage 4. I call these people "Stage Fours," and I believe that's the kind of people that societies should actively try to create. Independent and deep thought should be the goal of every student. Generation after generation the educational and family systems should be tweaked to that end, and eventually, when Stage Fours have assumed the majority... That is our only realistic hope for an end to all war and a decrease in injustice IMHO.

What do you think?

On my other computer I've got a bunch of citations if that need arises.
*EDIT: http://www.brainstages.net/4thr.html
I also edited for clarity.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I think the implied elitism is rather appalling. It's a very short road from here, to thinking of most people as in some sense "subhuman"...

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Bombadillo

Stage 1 - Sensorimotor Period - In infancy, we experience the world primarily through feeling things, staring at things, listening and smelling things, and putting things in our mouths.
Stage 2 - Preoperational Period - Toddlers begin to understand the world around them, but barely. Watching them talk to one another is listening to two separate yet face-to-face conversations at once.
Stage 3 - Operational Period - When we develop a better handle on our universe. We can be taught math, and can eyeball liquid volume in variously shaped containers. We become less cute.
Stage 4 - Abstract Operations - We graduate to the philosopher class.

I am amused by the fact that the three first stages get more explanation where they fit in the mental development, but that the fourth one lacks that. Graduate to the philosopher class? How exactly does this help you further in life? To me this list says that you need to go through the first three, but the fourth stage is just an add-on. So what is abstract thinking good for, actually?

[Aikanáro]

I can't quite believe that. I think that the vast majority of people have the capacity for abstract reasoning. Piaget's theory is interesting from a child-development perspective, but not when it's used to promote the idea that 'most people are stupid.' Most people seem to reach 'Stage 4' sometime in their teenage years. I'd question the study that states only one third of people ever do.

I do like his constructionist ideas about learning, though.

[Coffeehouse]

Originally Posted by Aikanáro

I can't quite believe that. I think that the vast majority of people have the capacity for abstract reasoning. Piaget's theory is interesting from a child-development perspective, but not when it's used to promote the idea that 'most people are stupid.' Most people seem to reach 'Stage 4' sometime in their teenage years. I'd question the study that states only one third of people ever do.

I do like his constructionist ideas about learning, though.

Why is Step 4, Abstract Operations, named the 'Philosopher Class'. Philosophy is, ever was, and will always be, devoted to the love of knowledge. Abstract thinking will only get you this far. Unless it is applied to understanding truth (usually about yourself) you can have as many abstract inclinations as you want... won't get you in front of the pack, and it won't give you a more wholesome life to live (which should be the aim right, or why bother hitting for new "levels"?)

I say stick to the Platonic and Kantian ideals that there is an inherent good in the conversation (be it online or face-to-face): Enjoying one's life through enhancing one's own moral reflection by speaking to, and reflecting on, on other people's life views and experiences.

My two cents.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Certainly, reflecting on experience is essential in the philosophical tradition, and conversation is a very important part of it. But, this is carried out on an abstract level. One doesn't philosophize from one single experience. Philosophy is about knowledge, yes. And knowledge is had, according to most philosophers, in the abstract. Certainly, this is the case with Plato. As for Kant, he's rather obscure, and I make no claim to understand him from what I have read of his writings. I would hazard a guess, based on his concern for a priori propositions (and his incomprehensible language!), that he would also see philosophy as an abstract reasoning process.

As regards "truth", the introduction of the term bare and naked is unhelpful. What do you mean by "truth"? The "truth" that most philosophers have sought is one which is found through abstract reasoning.