Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

MagicBag Grow Bags
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
My Philosophy Paper
    #6779784 -

For my class I have to write a paper on my metaphysics, epistemology, social & political, ethical, and religious philosophies. So far I have come up with this. Any advice or comments would be appreciated as it is very hard to comprehend and express my thoughts. Thanks.

What is ultimately real in this so called reality? Are there other realities out there rather than what exists to us in the physical world? I think there are two different types realities in which one is objective and one is subjective. I think there is the Noumena (objective reality), which is reality as it is and always has been - the ultimate reality. There is also the Phenomena (subjective reality), which is reality as we perceive it. Both types of different realities contain an infinite number of realities because every one moment within reality creates a new reality and the availability of more realities. When a certain path, or reality, in your life is chosen, all other realities diminish and form the next possible reality, or path. Reality is basically like a fractal. You are living in the moment, or the middle of the fractal, and anything can happen at one moment, so these infinite number of realities are created, which are the surroundings of the core of the fractal. The subjective reality is one's experience and how their senses react to those experiences. I believe the validity of one living in the subjective reality can be questioned, since each person aqcuires different experiences throughout their life. There is nothing to question of the objective reality because it is what it is and always will be and always has been - ultimate. All we can ever truly know is the phenomenal world, but that doesn't mean that the noumenal world doesn't exist. Perceiving reality as the Phenomena is the delusion we often find ourselves in. This doesn't mean that our interpretation of reality is wrong - what we perceive is what's real to us. The things being perceived are not necessarily exactly as we perceive them, but our perceptions are basically symbolizing what is there.

I think there is one underlying principle or substance, which is energy that I believe to be within the soul of each and every thing (as opposed to Thale's belief that water explains all of reality), and brings every thing together as one. This states that everything is one in the ultimate reality, and I believe that to be the ultimate truth. In order to realise this ultimate truth, we need to look past the ego and into the soul of everything, which isn't necessarily easy. Living in the objective, or ultimate reality, is when I feel one reaches liberation. I also believe ultimate reality is explained through a sort of dual aspect, the yin and the yang, which represents balance - harmony. Living in the objective, or ultimate reality, is when I feel one reaches liberation. Since I believe the ultimate truth to be that all is one, everything also must be infinite at the same time to create that harmony. This ultimate reality is very difficult to grasp and cannot be comprehended to the maximum because everything is infinite. I believe that the universe is synonymous with god. I believe that everything including you, me, everyone we know, everything we can or cannot see, are really one entity. We are all one in a reality we cannot see fully. From our point of view we appear to be separate beings. And for most cases, we are. Our brains are separate, and so go our thoughts and opinions. The unity transcends normal human life. I find myself treating people with more respect since I truly believe we are all one. We are god from different points of view.

I believe this ultimate truth, or reality, is what people would consider to be "God." Since the ultimate truth cannot be comprehended, neither can god. It is not a person, or force in which we worship. It is something in which we cannot fully comprehend because that ultimate truth is life, life is everything, and god is life. God is the higher power that created all of exitence. God is me, god is you, god is a component in everything around us, and god (life) is what brought being into existence. We will never know the meaning, or origin of life, because god is infinite. I believe god, which is everything, to be infinite because I think this universe became based off of an action creating a result. I think as with any mass, such as the universe, there is always an exterior power. If this is the case and there is an exterior power or force to our universe, then the force itself must of had mass (F=MA). If it had mass then by my reasoning that force would have an exterior power or force outside of it, and would go on endlessly. Those exterior forces are god - what "brought" us here (the higher power). In my opinion no being created reality. We just can't comprehend what brought us here, and the whole concept of life and reality is so complex, yet so simple at the same time. all is one, but yet all is infinite, everything is everything, yet everything is nothing at the same time. The yin, the yang. Black, white. Hot, cold. Small, tall. You need one in order for the other to exist. It's all about achieving that harmony, togetherness, oneness. We need that balance in everything to create harmony - universal love. That universal love is the expression of the harmony of all totality. Everything is in harmony with everything else and nothing is excluded, for we are all one. Your will is in harmony with your compassion. Your compassion is in harmony with your joy. Your joy is in harmony with your anger. Your anger is in harmony with your body. Your body is in harmony with both the ego and the soul. Your ego and soul are in harmony with other people. There is no conflict anywhere. Everything fits and functions as that togetherness and oneness. That oneness is you. That oneness is me. That oneness is all of reality.

We have the ability to live in this harmony, or in universal love because something is flowing through us and reality is unfolding as it will, yet there is still a duality between this and the experience of taking action, and it feels like free-will. So sing, dance, and spread your song of love. For love is god and god is life. God is the higher power. It is the force that allows us to see, but cannot be seen. It is what allows us to think and speak, but cannot be thought or spoken about. You cannot see, speak, or comprehend it because God is infinite, as is love, as is everything. That's why no one knows how or why we got here, because of it's infinity). All you need is eternal love, as eternal (infinite), or universal love is the end to all suffering. There would be no right or wrong. No seperation. Just as the Beatles say "Love is all you need." I believe that ultimate truth to be all is one (universal love) and if it is the universal truth, then the true nature of reality is in fact emptiness. If in fact the true nature of reality is emptiness, than rather than something coming from nothing, perhaps we should take into consideration that nothing came from something. That something being "God."


--------------------
I Ain't No Fool. Mama Didn't Raise No Fool.
----------primussucks

Edited by mushiemountain (04/13/07 12:43 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My Philosophy Paper [Re: mushiemountain]
    #6782933 -

no comments?:(


--------------------
I Ain't No Fool. Mama Didn't Raise No Fool.
----------primussucks

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My Philosophy Paper [Re: mushiemountain]
    #6783070 -

Just scanning it looks good, a few points all from no more than my opinion:

- You write in the first person, personally i think it sounds a bit amateur when such things are written like this, however that’s just me; i know many people who find things easier to follow when laid out in the first person.

- The repetition of 'i think' in the first few lines sounds bit silly to me, always try and construct the first paragraph of any essay to sound fluid yet direct. Even if you loosen your style past this it is quit often the initial impact that will form an impression for the reader.

- Perhaps state concisely a common linguistically definition of reality at the very beginning, it sounds a bit cliche immediately drawing on your interpretation of there being two respective forms of reality.

- Your actual ideas are well laid out and thought out, if done carefully your essay idea would be excellent.

- However the initial way in which you convey your key point is rather confusing: "which is reality as we perceive it. Both types of different realities contain an infinite number of realities because every one moment within reality creates a new reality and the availability of more realities.", i would try and halve the amount of times you mention 'reality' in that quoted piece, try and be a bit more fluid with the punctuation and make it more snapping and concise in that each point you make is clearly stated and can easily be weighed up by the reader without them rereading the a rather tongue twisting couple of sentences.

In short your idea is great however i feel it would be far better if you spent a few minutes reconstructing the opening paragraph so that the gist is easier to pick up. Just my knee jerk reaction to it.


--------------------
"All credibility, all good conscience, all evidence of truth come only from the senses. " ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My Philosophy Paper [Re: Amberthefrog]
    #6783413 -

Good paper, although I'd advise not using the first or second person point of view-- at all.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My Philosophy Paper [Re: vigilant_mind]
    #6783458 -

thank you for the feedback! anymore is greatly appreciated.

all my views are hard to express in words. dammit.


--------------------
I Ain't No Fool. Mama Didn't Raise No Fool.
----------primussucks

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My Philosophy Paper [Re: mushiemountain]
    #6783636 -

I want to start off by first saying that your essay is extremely elegant. The statements flow together very well and your ideas are expressed in a manner that makes them easy to visualize. You are a very articulate and imaginative writer. However I do have some criticisms regarding how your paper is put together at a logical and philosophical level.

First of all, the subjects you have chosen to write your paper on are simply too broad for a philosophy class. "metaphysics, epistemology, social & political, ethical, and religious philosophies" are each complex subjects in themselves which have been subject to a great deal of debate and study. Most philosophers who wrote about their beliefs on even one of those subjects will probably make a series book length arguments on the subject. If you want to be taken seriously by your professor you will have to narrow the scope of your paper. Covering all those fields in one essay will make your paper seem "a mile wide and an inch deep", it would be like writing an essay on "biology, mathematics, chemistry and physics"- the end result will be extremely superficial.

Secondly, a lot of your statements open up with "I believe". Simply putting, a mere belief in something does not warrant your accepting the idea in philosophy. That is because philosophy is not just a subject where anything goes--you are dealing with issues that have been debated for centuries. There are complex arguments between different schools of thought that have been advanced throughout the course of history, simply brushing these arguments aside by merely saying "I believe X" will seem presumptuous. It would be equivalent to me going into an astronomy class and saying "I believe stars are giant balls of gas like Lord Kelvin saids", that may seem alright for someone who knows nothing about astronomy, but for anyone who has actually studied the subject your beliefs will simply come off as inaccurate. Like I said, simply stating that your philosophy is a series of beliefs will make it seem like you understand philosophy as a subject where people present random ideas instead of a serious subject.

Last, I would like to note that the five arguments you did present are fallacious.

1-"I believe the validity of one living in the subjective reality can be questioned, since each person aqcuires different experiences throughout their life. There is nothing to question of the objective reality because it is what it is and always will be and always has been - ultimate."

That is circular reasoning. You may as well be saying "God exists because the bible says so, and the Bible is true because it was written by God." Simply saying "this is so because it is" doesn't get you very far in philosophy.

2-"I think there is one underlying principle or substance, which is energy that I believe to be within the soul of each and every thing (as opposed to Thale's belief that water explains all of reality), and brings every thing together as one."

That is a false dilemma. There are more underlying substances presented in philosophy then water or energy (which in this case would be spiritual energy, since technically energy is material). For example, there is dualism (where things are explained as material and spiritual), monad pluralism (the idea that everything is composed of windowless units of thought called monads), pantheism (everything is composed of God), subjective idealism (everything is merely what you perceive), objective idealism (the notion that matter does not exist, only god and mind) and materialism (the notion that everything is physical).

I'm sure there are more, but I suppose you get my point.

3-"We will never know the meaning, or origin of life, because god is infinite."

I think you may be equating meaning with purpose.

Quote:
The sense that sentient creatures have of the patterns they recognize in the world, as a result of an understanding of phenomena in a coherent way, is commonly referred to as a person's sense of "meaning". This is the sense of meaning at work when asking a person when they leave a theatre, "What did that movie mean to you?" In short, the word "meaning" can sometimes be used to describe the interpretations that people have of the world.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaning_%28non-linguistic%29


Quote:
Purpose in its most general sense is the anticipated aim which guides action.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purpose

4-"I think as with any mass, such as the universe, there is always an exterior power. If this is the case and there is an exterior power or force to our universe, then the force itself must of had mass (F=MA). If it had mass then by my reasoning that force would have an exterior power or force outside of it, and would go on endlessly."

There are two problems with the above assertion:

1- How do you justify the statement that there is always an exterior power? Do you have some sort of reasoning underlying your assertion, or is it just an assumption?

2- The argument above seems circular. You are saying that force must have mass because mass requires an exterior power, and you reason this out by saying that is true because force has an exterior power. Again you may as well be saying that God is true because of the Bible, and the Bible is true because of God.

I would like to end by saying that I don't know the aims of your professor, so a lot of what I said above may be irrelevant. Your professor may be more interested for example in seeing how well you articulate your philosophical world view then in how well you justify it. That being the case I believe you don't need to modify your essay. I only note the issue of justification since philosophers in practice spend most of their time making arguments for various positions. You will not pick up a philosophical peer reviewed journal and find an essay that states "I believe A, I believe B, I believe C" over and over again because that is effectively no different then just making claims up.

If you take the subject of philosophy seriously you will have to radically alter your paper in such a way as to justify every single one of your statements through some sort of logical or empirical argument. If you are just looking to pass the class and don't take philosophy seriously, then I suppose just putting forth random thoughts is acceptable- however if that is the case I would abandon any hope of being a professional philosopher.

I know a lot of what I said above may come off as a little harsh, but given the way you wrote your paper, it seems insulting to the subject. You can tell that the writer does not know what philosophy really is, does not know the history of it, has never given serious reflection on the fundamental principles of their world view and doesn't know how philosophers practice their profession. Like I said, it comes off as though you are saying philosophy is a meaningless subject where people just sit around and present random ideas without any serious thought or justification.


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


"Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin

Edited by FrenchSocialist (04/13/07 03:35 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My Philosophy Paper [Re: mushiemountain]
    #6783750 -

What grade did you get on this paper?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My Philosophy Paper [Re: vigilant_mind]
    #6800809 -

instead of stating "I believe ..." "I think...", what would be a better way of putting it as? and i find it very hard to not write in first or second person. i remember my teacher stating that we do need to write in first person though, but with my beliefs it would be contradicting to use "I". i haven't gotten a grade on it yet. it's due thursday. i showed my teacher what i wrote above and he made the following comments...

-if the only reality we can truly know is the phenomenal world, then why do i assume there is the noumenal world?

-if god can't be comprehended, then why say god is...____.?

-"your body is in harmony with both the ego and the soul"...what is the ego? what is the soul?

-"all we need is love"...not true (ethics). we need more than love -principles, virtues, etc.

-talk about the first cause, God (he told me to check out Aquinas Religion Language).

he actually said my level is way above everyone else and that my paper is very well written and critical. he just wants me to push it further. i'm having a hard time coming up with things to write about. any help is appreciated. i know many of you share my same views and such, so shed some light.


--------------------
I Ain't No Fool. Mama Didn't Raise No Fool.
----------primussucks

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* A dissertation on the aspects of subjectivity.
( 1 2 all )		 Anonymous 2,896 20 09/21/02 02:01 AM
by Anonymous
* Problems in Philosophy: Knowledge chodamunky 1,163 3 05/03/04 08:38 AM
by TheShroomHermit
* Bad Philosophy Is Inconsistent
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 SkorpivoMusterion 8,500 72 02/16/06 07:20 PM
by SkorpivoMusterion
* Are morals subjective?
( 1 2 all )		 Anonymous 6,268 35 04/24/03 05:58 AM
by MarkostheGnostic
* Starting point of a (my) philosophy.
( 1 2 all )		 Xanthas 3,635 25 04/13/06 01:20 PM
by RedNucleus
* What is philosophy? / Have you studied academic philosophy? *DELETED* *DELETED*
( 1 2 all )		 Lakefingers 5,261 35 11/15/05 11:01 AM
by CosmicJoke
* Philosophy: Who needs it?
( 1 2 all )		 Anonymous 4,274 24 05/27/08 06:51 AM
by zouden
* quality in art: subjective? wilshire 1,436 18 08/10/06 03:25 PM
by vampirism

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
1,430 topic views. 0 members, 647 guests and 29 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.024 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.