The Philosophy Thread

[The Unseen]

Originally Posted by Paranoidmoonduck

Favorite philosophers everybody?

I still haven't read enough philosophy, but from what I can tell I'd like the ordinary language philosophers like later Wittgenstein, JL Austin, Grice, and Searle. If we're talking about Ancient Greek philosophy, I like what I've heard about Aristotle, Socrates, Epicurus but not Plato. I've read up a little on existentialism which thus would describe guys like Sartre, Paul Tillich, and Heidegger; it's very interesting and it says some good things but I wouldn't consider myself one.

Oh, and I think what Renji is getting at is about how concepts don't really have a solid definition. Things like "charisma," "liberalism," "love," etc are so screwy in scope that it may lead people to think that they don't exist because they are used so differently. The best we can do is define them for a discussion, finding the necessary and sufficient conditions of the definition and recognizing the differences in use and definition between people, and see what we can agree upon that it refers to.

[Gay Ork Wang]

Originally Posted by The Unseen

I'm glad that we're all inferior to you now!



Of course a centaur exists. It doesn't exist in the real world, but it sure as hell exists in story books and what-not. Are we excepted not to have words for things that are in story books?

You may of course reply that maybe charisma doesn't exist in the real world and just in our imaginations, but all the examples of charisma are in the real world. Since it's really just a word for a noteworthy combination of emotions and attitudes, it's pretty easy to say it exists. We may debate the parameters of the definition (is that person being charismatic right now?) but that's a different question.

i guess so. thats what i was trying to say.

[Brothgar]

Originally Posted by iworshipbender

I remember when I used to argue about religion.

Then I turned 17.

I remember when I thought I was too cool to discuss religion with others. Then I turned 21.

[CJSchneider]

If you remember in one of my earlier posts I said we could probably agree on who is charismatic and who isn't, but what you base your argument off of is like saying a car is a car. in which case I'll gladly trade you my Saturn for your BMW (hey a car is a car right).

Charisma is a combination of various elements perceived by others to make a person have a certain attractiveness which people are drawn to. Personal preferences surely play a part into this, but it is this combonation of many things, either perceived by the conscious or subconscious that makes up charisma.

[iworshipbender]

It's not about me being too cool to discuss religion. It's just come to the point that if I do discuss religion, I want to gouge my eyes out because there is absolutely no point in it. You are never going to convince someone that the bible is not a book that should be used as reference and no one is going to be convinced of any omnipresent being like a god if they don't believe in it already.

[Jvig43]

Originally Posted by iworshipbender

It's not about me being too cool to discuss religion. It's just come to the point that if I do discuss religion, I want to gouge my eyes out because there is absolutely no point in it. You are never going to convince someone that the bible is not a book that should be used as reference and no one is going to be convinced of any omnipresent being like a god if they don't believe in it already.

The best thing I find about discussion is that the goal doesnt have to be to convince others your right. I love talking with people who see things differently then I do, it helps to see things from the other side. Too many people see things in terms of right and wrong, but its much more beneficial to just talk and walk away from the conversation with a better understanding of everything.

[The Unseen]

Originally Posted by iworshipbender

It's not about me being too cool to discuss religion. It's just come to the point that if I do discuss religion, I want to gouge my eyes out because there is absolutely no point in it. You are never going to convince someone that the bible is not a book that should be used as reference and no one is going to be convinced of any omnipresent being like a god if they don't believe in it already.

You've confused discussing religion with evangelism.

[Paranoidmoonduck]

Originally Posted by CJSchneider

Charisma is a combination of various elements perceived by others to make a person have a certain attractiveness which people are drawn to. Personal preferences surely play a part into this, but it is this combonation of many things, either perceived by the conscious or subconscious that makes up charisma.

If it helps anybody, let's look at the polar concept: awkwardness. Does awkwardness exist? Is it a concept that people react to in real life? Is it a judgement that people place on themselves and others based on the way they interact with the people around them? I would say all the answer to these are yes.

Now, granted, concepts like these are open to some interpretation in practice. To what degree of the concept someone recognizes charisma or awkwardness is pretty loose, but that's true for almost any concept. Tall/short are relative judgments that would vary based on the conditions of the sample size you are referencing (ex: If I grew up as a Maasai in Kenya, my idea of tall or short wouldn't come close to reflecting yours).

I'm not saying that the status of a concept always reflects that of its polar, but in this case I think they are quite similar.

[Brent]

Originally Posted by Paranoidmoonduck

Does awkwardness exist?

a situation is awkward only to the person who feels awkward.

[CJSchneider]

No, PMD is correct, there is a polar opposite to charisma. If "charisma" is the perception of traits, so would be "awkwardness".

[Paranoidmoonduck]

Originally Posted by Brent

a situation is awkward only to the person who feels awkward.

Is charisma not bound to the same interaction necessity to find its meaning? A person is only charismatic if the person interacting with them recognizes them as such.

[steve buscemi]

Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum

[CJSchneider]

[The Unseen]

That's basically a form of the liar's paradox, which says that the truth value of anything like "This statement is false" is a paradox.

I don't have a good answer.

[EvilMonkey]

I think therefore I am.

However, I have sexual dreams but wake up knowing my **** was unsucked so I know my thinking is not always true.

Therefore, can I say with 100% certainty that I exist?

[The Unseen]

that's you dreaming, not thinking.

Also, if you hallucinate, that still proves that there is something that hallucinates, meaning that you exist. The hallucinated things may not exist, but someone is hallucinating them.

How far the cogito can be extended is debatable. As in, to what extent do you exist, and what makes up "you"?

[steve buscemi]

Actually its "I think I Think therefore I think that I am"

[wogitalia]

Charisma for me is that intangible thing beyond that which you can explain that attracts you to another human. I do not think it is quantifiable though, which makes it hard, perhaps it is best described as the combination of things beyond that which is obvious that makes you like someone. It is an aura as much as anything.

[Gay Ork Wang]

I dont think anyone is charismatic. I just dont see saying someone is charismatic is of any use.

saying someone is charismatic for me is basically saying: hey, that guy did something.

Charisma is something that depends on the person himself.
People thought Hitler was charismatic. I dont think so at all. He looked like an awkward little man, just really ugly, speaking really really weird things. Just because he came everytime he spoke openly, doesnt mean i think he is charismatic.
For me its like Good or bad. A person cant be good or cant be bad. Hitler was good in the eyes of people that supported him, bad in the eyes of those he persecuted. Therefore, saying someone is good, is really not of use for anything.

I feel like, even though tall and small is a relative concept, it can be of use when talking with people that are used to the same standards. There is no standard for charisma. no relativ fix point.

also: i dont understand what u mean by car.

[CJSchneider]

If you think all cars are the same you are wrong. If you don't believe that, try getting someone who drives a Mercedes to trade it for a "hoopty" - even trade.
It was my analogy to your statement about cakes being the same.

In regards to charisma, can it be broken down into identifiable traits? Surely, but to say it does not exist is like saying a car does not exist because it can be broken down into identifiable pieces (bolts, nuts, tires, etc). Charisma may be different because the traits are not always the same and have an inter as well as intrapersonal set of differences.

[Gay Ork Wang]

Originally Posted by CJSchneider

If you think all cars are the same you are wrong. If you don't believe that, try getting someone who drives a Mercedes to trade it for a "hoopty" - even trade.
It was my analogy to your statement about cakes being the same.

In regards to charisma, can it be broken down into identifiable traits? Surely, but to say it does not exist is like saying a car does not exist because it can be broken down into identifiable pieces (bolts, nuts, tires, etc). Charisma may be different because the traits are not always the same and have an inter as well as intrapersonal set of differences.

okay i admit i was wrong with the existance. but its not a characteristic in itself and it really doesnt help at all

[CJSchneider]

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

okay i admit i was wrong with the existance. but its not a characteristic in itself and it really doesnt help at all

That depends on what you are using it for. I promise you a car salesman with charisma sells more then one with out it.

[Gay Ork Wang]

Originally Posted by CJSchneider

That depends on what you are using it for. I promise you a car salesman with charisma sells more then one with out it.

thats what im saying. thats prolly just a salesman handy with words. Charisma is just a really really broad view on that. Id rather use a little more specific description. Charismatic is not a personal characteristic and therefore not really that useful describing people

[CJSchneider]

Handy with words or the ability to effectively communicate is just part of charisma, along with confidence, attractions we are aware of only on a subconscious level, etc. Would the same guy who was handy with words be as charismatic if he had bad skin, a dead tooth and was was obese?

[TitleTown088]

Originally Posted by iworshipbender

It's not about me being too cool to discuss religion. It's just come to the point that if I do discuss religion, I want to gouge my eyes out because there is absolutely no point in it. You are never going to convince someone that the bible is not a book that should be used as reference and no one is going to be convinced of any omnipresent being like a god if they don't believe in it already.

Originally Posted by iworshipbender

I remember when I used to argue about religion.
Then I turned 17.

I don't think anyone was really arguing. If people don't discuss religion/philosophy, how can thought advance? There's nothing counterproductive about discussing it unless you make it out to be.

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

People thought Hitler was charismatic. I dont think so at all.

Godwins Law. ;)