Philosophical Subject of the Moment

Free discussion of anything human or divine ~ Philosophy, Religion and Spirituality

Moderators: Xar, Fist and Faith

Post Reply
User avatar
[Syl]
Unfettered One
Posts: 13017
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:36 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Philosophical Subject of the Moment

Post by [Syl] »

Well, this will probably end up being another of my failed experiments, but we'll see. Basically, I'm going to throw out a subject, maybe a few quotes and links, and let it go from there. If someone wants to put forth a new topic, just let me know. I plan on changing the topic about every week or so.

First up, Paradox
From The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy
A paradox arises when a set of apparently incontrovertible premises gives unacceptable or contradictory conclusions. To solve a paradox will involve either showing that there is a hidden flaw in the premises, or that the reasoning is erroneous, or that the apparently unacceptable conclusion can, in fact, be tolerated. Paradoxes are therefore important in philosophy, for until one is solved it shows that there is something about our reasonings and our concepts that we do not understand...
And these should be familiar
This power is a paradox, because Power does not exist without Law, and wild magic has no Law; and white gold is a paradox, because it speaks for the bone of life, but has no part of the Land. And he who wields white wild magic gold is a paradox for he is everything and nothing, hero and fool, potent, helpless and with the one word of truth or treachery he will save or damn the Earth because he is mad and sane, cold and passionate, lost and found.
philosophy.fas.nyu.edu/docs/IO/1158/revengetex3.pdf
dingo.sbs.arizona.edu/~thorgan/papers/Two.Envelopes.and.Foundations.htm
Plissken
Lord
Posts: 7617
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 5:24 pm
Location: Just Waiting

Post by Plissken »

What are we to do with this topic? Give examples? Argue for or against? It's an interesting experiment, but I don't want to take it in the wrong direction right out of the gate.
“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
-- James Madison

"If you're going to tell people the truth, you'd better make them laugh. Otherwise they'll kill you." - George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
[Syl]
Unfettered One
Posts: 13017
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:36 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by [Syl] »

There is no wrong direction. Just run with it. (I thought about putting up something more controversial, but I had to go with the covenant tie-in)
"It is not the literal past that rules us, save, possibly, in a biological sense. It is images of the past. Each new historical era mirrors itself in the picture and active mythology of its past or of a past borrowed from other cultures. It tests its sense of identity, of regress or new achievement against that past.”
-George Steiner
User avatar
Prebe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 7926
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 7:19 pm
Location: People's Republic of Denmark

Post by Prebe »

I feel that the term paradox is often misused instead of the word oxymoron. For example "Sweet sorrow" is an oxymoron and not a paradox, because both words are elastic enough to accommodate the amalgamation.

The quote:
This power is a paradox, because Power does not exist without Law, and wild magic has no Law.
I believe this one is a nice example of part of the dictionary definition: we don’t know enough the true nature of the objects of the premises (wild magic, power and law).
User avatar
ur-bane
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 3496
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 10:35 am
Location: United States of Andelain

Post by ur-bane »

I think we need to decide the type of Law of which we are speaking.

Human Law? The Laws of the Universe?
In terms of Covenant, we are obviously speaking of the latter.

But the Lords, Giants, Stonedownors, Woodhelvennin--they don't understand the Laws of the universe. This point is proven by the different creation myths that exist in the land. No person or race in the Land or elsewhere in the Arch of Time (Except maybe Foul himself, but his POV on the subject is never given) knows for sure how their universe was created, and therefore also do not know all its laws.

To say that wild magic (Power) is Lawless and therefore is a paradox is incorrect.

Before Covenant's arrival in the Land, they knew nothing of white gold except that which was written in old songs and legend.

But how can one hope to understand something that is not of ones world? How can understanding be gained when there is nothing to study?

White Gold/wild magic is not a paradox--not Lawless--rather, it is not understood, and the Laws that govern its use/existence are not understood.
Image

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want
to test a man's character, give him power.
--Abraham Lincoln

Excerpt from Animal Songs Never Written
"Hey, dad," croaked the vulture, "what are you eating?"
"Carrion, my wayward son."
"Will there be pieces when you are done?"
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23439
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

I love oxymorons! :D Jumbo shrimp is a good one. My favorite is the putty used to fill nail holes - Plastic Wood. :lol:

Anyway, I think paradoxes are usually simply the result of the things mentioned in the Oxford definition.
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
Prebe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 7926
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 7:19 pm
Location: People's Republic of Denmark

Post by Prebe »

Are you calling the people of The Land ignorant Ur-bane????

:D
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

A paradox should be para-doctored.
Can't remember who said that, but it's always stuck in my head.

Nice idea Syl, although what I can say about paradox(i?) (es?) I'm not sure. I tend to think of the time-travel conundrums that we recently mentioned in another thread when the term crops up, that and the obvious Covenant allusion. ;)

Anybody have an example of an unrefutable paradox which forces us to accept the apparently self-contradictory nature thereof?
Niels Bohr wrote:The opposite of a trivial truth is false. But the opposite of a Great Truth is also True
Walt Whitman wrote:I contradict myself? So what if I contradict myself. (I am large, I contain multitudes.
:lol:

--A
User avatar
ur-bane
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 3496
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 10:35 am
Location: United States of Andelain

Post by ur-bane »

Avatar wrote:Anybody have an example of an unrefutable paradox which forces us to accept the apparently self-contradictory nature thereof?
Does such a thing exist? ;)
Image

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want
to test a man's character, give him power.
--Abraham Lincoln

Excerpt from Animal Songs Never Written
"Hey, dad," croaked the vulture, "what are you eating?"
"Carrion, my wayward son."
"Will there be pieces when you are done?"
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19621
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

Does such a thing exist?
Sure, they abound in quantum mechanics. The fact that really small objects behave like both particles and waves. This is paradoxical because the properties of waves and particles cannot be reconciled, yet both descritions mathematically describe electrons, photons, etc.

And many philosophers believe that humans are a paradox still unresolved by centuries of speculation. Mind/body dualism has been unraveled since Descartes' time (most successfuly--in my opinion--by phenomenology), but the paradoxical nature which gave impetus to such thinking has merely receded to even more difficult and esoteric levels of thought and experience. Our experience as a subjective self in an object world is still very much paradoxical.
User avatar
Prebe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 7926
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 7:19 pm
Location: People's Republic of Denmark

Post by Prebe »

Fantastic examples Malik23

:wave:
Last edited by Prebe on Tue Aug 23, 2005 7:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

I like it. Especially that last one. A subjective self in an objective world.

Interesting. Although, I must ask, is the world really that objective? Or are you speaking literally?

--A
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23439
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

I think the wave/particle thing is just our ignorance talking. If these really small objects always behave like particles under certain circumstances, and always behave like waves under certain different circumstances, then they're following specific laws of nature. The apparent paradox is caused by our imperfect attempt to define what we have learned from our limited perceptions.

These two quotes of Eknath Easwaran, which I've quoted before, deal with the "subjective self in an object world" idea.
Sankhya is not trying to describe physical reality; it is analyzing consciousness, knowledge, for the sole purpose of unraveling the human being's true identity. So it does not begin with the material universe as something different and separate from the mind that perceives it. It does not talk about sense objects outside us and senses within and then try to get the two together. It begins with one world of experience. Sense objects and senses are not separate; they are two aspects of the same event. Mind, energy, and matter are a continuum, and the universe is not described as it might be in itself, but as it presents itself to the human mind. As they say in the "new physics," it is not just an observable universe but a participatory universe.
Brahmavidya and conventional science both begin when a person finds that the world of sense impressions, so transient and superficial, is not enough in itself to satisfy the desire for meaning. Then one begins to stand back a little from the senses and look below the surface show of life in search of underlying connection. But the sages of the Upanishads wanted more than explanations of the outside world. They sought principles that would unify and explain the whole of human experience: including, at the same time, the world within the mind. If the observer observes through the medium of consciousness, and the world too is observed in consciousness, should not the same laws apply to both?
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Fist and Faith wrote:
It does not talk about sense objects outside us and senses within and then try to get the two together. It begins with one world of experience. Sense objects and senses are not separate; they are two aspects of the same event.
Great quotes Fist.

--A
User avatar
Prebe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 7926
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 7:19 pm
Location: People's Republic of Denmark

Post by Prebe »

Fist: Could be ignorance, but then again, to me quantum mechanics never made ANY sense. I am deply awe struck by those who comprehend i.

By the way, I've go one! Oh! Oh! Pick me! Pick me!

A pro-lifer who endorses capital punishment.

Now there's a paradox
"I would have gone to the thesaurus for a more erudite word."
-Hashi Lebwohl
User avatar
ur-bane
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 3496
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 10:35 am
Location: United States of Andelain

Post by ur-bane »

Prebe wrote:
By the way, I've go one! Oh! Oh! Pick me! Pick me!

A pro-lifer who endorses capital punishment.

Now there's a paradox
Not really, if you think about it. A pro-lifer's stance is that every baby(fetus/zygote) deserves a chance to be born and live. If that baby grows up and uses his chance to kill, that same pro-lifer could endorse capital punishment knowing that at least the baby-now-adult got a chance to live.
Image

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want
to test a man's character, give him power.
--Abraham Lincoln

Excerpt from Animal Songs Never Written
"Hey, dad," croaked the vulture, "what are you eating?"
"Carrion, my wayward son."
"Will there be pieces when you are done?"
User avatar
Prebe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 7926
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 7:19 pm
Location: People's Republic of Denmark

Post by Prebe »

True, if pro-life means anti-abortion. But I was trying to discourage the 'pro-life' term, if it is nothing but a euphemism for anti-abortion.

If you want to call yourself 'pro-life' you should be against killing anyone regardless of the reason.
"I would have gone to the thesaurus for a more erudite word."
-Hashi Lebwohl
User avatar
sgt.null
Jack of Odd Trades, Master of Fun
Posts: 47250
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:53 am
Location: Brazoria, Texas
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 6 times

Post by sgt.null »

or anything, being a pro-life, anti-abortion, anti-euthenesia, anti-death penalty vegetarian.

but why are some many pro-abortion folks anti-death penalty? for the destruction of innocents but for the saving of murderers? that makes little sense.
Lenin, Marx
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
User avatar
Cail
Lord
Posts: 38981
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 1:36 am
Location: Hell of the Upside Down Sinners

Post by Cail »

What about plant's rights?
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." - PJ O'Rourke
_____________
"Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas." - Charles Stewart
_____________
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
_____________
User avatar
Prebe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 7926
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 7:19 pm
Location: People's Republic of Denmark

Post by Prebe »

SgtNull wrote:or anything, being a pro-life, anti-abortion, anti-euthenesia, anti-death penalty vegetarian.
I suppose in that case you could use the term pro-life, to save some space :)

I was merely stating that many people, who claim to be pro-life, endorse capital punishment. They should not - by calling themselves pro-life - to make it seem like it is everybody else, that are against life, when in fact pro-capital punishment anti-abortionists subscribe to the taking of conscient life, while objecting to killing a fetus with scarce neural connectivity, or even more extreme: a zygote.

I think you have the answer to your question in that last sentence.
Cail wrote:What about plant's rights?
I thought that might come up. In my view it only underlines how bad a term pro-life is, because it is charged; for the very good reason mentioned above. If the charge contained therein cannot be endorsed by those who use it they should find another term. Preferably one fitting the subject of the discussion at hand (I don't mean this discussion btw).
Post Reply

Return to “The Close”