• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Philosophy

#21
basstriaxis said:
Not to get overly religious, but I think every person who has an interest in philosophic thought should attempt to read some holy books in their entirity.
Click to expand...

Well they are two completely different things and you might well say that religion and philosophy are actually opposites!!

So - as some people have mentioned : Philosophy has no answers but helps you define your questions accurately; whereas Religion has answers without clearly-defined questions!! ;)
 
#22
Bruce Lindfield said:
Well they are two completely different things and you might well say that religion and philosophy are actually opposites!!

So - as some people have mentioned : Philosophy has no answers but helps you define your questions accurately; whereas Religion has answers without clearly-defined questions!! ;)
Click to expand...

Agreed. But don't you think that world religions have had an influence on how we think, even if you are not a religious person? It's like how your parents influence the way you are as a person later in life, even if you try not to be like them in every way. True, religion can be seen as the opposite of philosophy, but neither philosophy nor religion can be viewed in a total vacuum either.
 
#23
The Bible's only really useful if you read the original Hebrew version, seeing as the English "translation" is actually pretty badly distorted and in many places deviates significantly from the original and in fact retells some stories differently to back up what the Church had been telling people. Also, the English version had to make up many sections for the same reason, and a good deal of the phrases and manners of speaking we use now come from this "translation". The other bugbear is that unless you go down the Jehovas Witness line, it's all metaphor and when you get metaphor you get variable interpretations which is never good for trying to get a unified theory.

Anyhoo, I need some eats!
 
#24
Good point as well. Perhaps then, in line with this thread, religious books should be read to see what the apparent philosophers in it say. Read them with the mindset of Jesus, Muhammed, Buddha, etc. as philosophers, in the same vein as Freud, Niztche, and others.

Ok, back to philosophy! Here's a philosophy question for you guys to ponder:

Do donut holes exist?
 
#30
basstriaxis said:
I don't think that donut holes exist. They are figments of our collective imagination.
Click to expand...

Donut holes DO exist. They are there to determine where the donut IS NOT from an inside perspective. Thus, we can sleep well at night knowing that donuts can be explained to annoying, precocious children as: nothing-donut-nothing. Without the hole it would simply be: nothing-donut. :rolleyes:

I have two friends that can corroborate this. Their names are Phil and Sofie.

I sometimes tell people to go away because they bother me, but I'm not sure what bothers me, why the bother is here, or if there is a logical plan for this bother administered by a benevolent creator being outside of time. Plus, if you actually did go away, would not something from away come here to fill the donut-hole sized void that you left by leaving, or did not leave? :confused:

Mike :D
 
#31
Holes are a lack of existance isolated amongst existance. It's odd that the exact nature of non-existance is determined by what exactly is not existing and the shape and position of the non-existance. The lack of existance of dough is a doughnut hole, or bagel hole. The lack of existance of shoe leather can either be an eyelet, a ventalation hole, or the opening of the shoe.

Here's something else: cleavage. Does it exist? No? Then why do women spend money on bras that enhance what doesn't exist? And why am I so drawn to it? Are women, in fact, controlling me with nothing? Is it some sort of mental blackhole??

Oh and *******s, do they exist? If not, why are not allow to mention them on national television and radio?
 
#33
AltIII said:
Holes are a lack of existance isolated amongst existance. It's odd that the exact nature of non-existance is determined by what exactly is not existing and the shape and position of the non-existance. The lack of existance of dough is a doughnut hole, or bagel hole. The lack of existance of shoe leather can either be an eyelet, a ventalation hole, or the opening of the shoe.
Click to expand...


So what are the little round things that donut shops are selling as "donut holes"? Have donut makers trancended the laws of physics?
 
#34
basstriaxis said:
So what are the little round things that donut shops are selling as "donut holes"? Have donut makers trancended the laws of physics?
Click to expand...
No, they are just inaccurately named. Assuming donut holes are indeed the product of cutting the middle out of a disc of dough (not all doughnuts are made that way), the excess dough left behind is not the hole. That's like digging and calling the pile of dirt left behind a "hole". Donut hole just sound better than donut biproduct. ONe donut company calls them munchkins, I'm not sure if they still do, that might get them into a little lawsuit.....
 
#35
Eric Cioe said:
Does philosophy interest anyone else here?

I went on a book binge today, and bought:

Bertrand Russell: Problems with Philosophy and Why I Am Not A Christian
Soren Kierkegaard: Fear and Trembling
Plato: Republic

Earlier this week, I bought Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra, which I am enjoying.

I've read the two major Ayn Rand works and a few smaller ones, and I've read parts of a Kierkegaard Anthology.

I find this stuff extremely interesting. Does anyone else find it thus? If so, what do you recommend I pick up next time I do a philosophy binge?
Click to expand...

i have absolutely no interest in philosophy.










:D
 
#37
Donut holes are just an abstraction. It's really that simple.

All the properties of donut holes - ALL of em - are derived from those of donuts. That means when you speak of donut holes, you actually referring to an abstraction of a certain facet of the donut entity. Speaking of such a hole in and of itself would be meaningless, because without a donut our donut hole has no properties and is just a bit of semantic trickery.

Same goes for cleavage obviously, although much more mental effort must go into thinking about that which cleavage is defined as the absence of, than donut holes.


Err... yeah. Make sense?
 
#38
Eric Cioe said:
Does philosophy interest anyone else here?

I went on a book binge today, and bought:

Bertrand Russell: Problems with Philosophy and Why I Am Not A Christian
Soren Kierkegaard: Fear and Trembling
Plato: Republic

Earlier this week, I bought Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra, which I am enjoying.

I've read the two major Ayn Rand works and a few smaller ones, and I've read parts of a Kierkegaard Anthology.

I find this stuff extremely interesting. Does anyone else find it thus? If so, what do you recommend I pick up next time I do a philosophy binge?
Click to expand...

I recommend Arthur Schopenhauer's "The World as Will and Representation".
 
#40
Thought I'd give this thing a bump.

I've picked up all sorts of philosophy since this thread started:
Aristotle's Metaphysics and Nicomachean Ethics
James' Pragmatism
Jeans' Philosophy of Physics
Aurelius' Meditations
Several pieces by Einstein on Relativity
Machiavelli's The Prince
The Federalist Papers
The Communist Manifesto
The Dialouges of Plato
Adler's Ten Philosophical Mistakes
et cetera

It's going to take me a while to read through these, and I'm forever buying new ones too.

Just thought I'd give this thread a bump (first in a few months).
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back