It's been a while ( I had to hang out with the ninjas)

[Ryu]

Hello everyone!! It's great to see that Mousel's is up again. Tim, your hard work does not go unnoticed or unappreciated.
Well I will try to post when I can, but I am extremely busy working for my bachelor's in Philosophy, and later a Phd hopefully. So I'm up to my neck in work, and barely have time to throw a wrestling dummy around.

But I will post when I can. Welcome back, everyone.

Take care,
Ryu

[Mako]

Bachelors in Philosophy? You plan on teaching, right?

I had a minor in Philosophy, I loved it. I was going to major until the day my dad asked the question every liberal arts major dreads... "So, what exactly are you going to DO with a (fill in the blank) degree?"

I said, wow, uhhh, hmmm... change majors?!?! LOL!

[Hawk]

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
Mako, you hit it right between the eyes!! One of my little cousins' was aces in math, but wanted get a degree in Sociology. I talked her into getting an Accounting degree. One of her friends got a Sociology Degree & is about to starve to death. She got her CPA and lives very comfortably. A holiday doesn't go by without her thanking me profusely. That was 20 years ago.
Hawk

______________________________________________________
You can't run away from a weakness;
Sometimes you must either fight it or perish;
And if that be so;
Why not now & where you stand.

[Edited by Hawk on 09-26-2000 at 01:50 PM]

[Ryu]

LOL! Ouch, guys.
Well in all honesty I think I do plan on teaching for a little bit. My passion is probably writing, and I am copyrighting a fiction work that I'm trying to do something with
I've given a lot of consideration to the money issue, but as far as the kind of guy I am...it wouldn't matter if my income was a bit smaller than most, as long as I can possibly create something that gives people inspiration, and a realization of some of the values I deem very worthwhile

But then again...it be nice to at least have enough money to be eating a Big Mac while doing it.

Besides, I can think deep thoughts about being unemployed.


Take care,
Ryu

[Hawk]

Hey Ryu,
Go for it man!!! Don't let me bring you down!! Its better to be poor & happy then rich & miserable.
Hawk

______________________________________________________
You can't run away from a weakness;
Sometimes you must either fight it or perish;
And if that be so;
Why not now & where you stand.

[Water Dragon]

So what do you identify with more? Nietsche's Uberman or Kierkegaard's Christian guilt complex?

[891477587]

.

I heard Tank Abbott has a Masters Degree. He seems to eat alright.

[Ryu (non-working password]

Okay something is seriously wrong with my password. I don't think I got an email about the link I was supposed to take. So now I'm stuck with registering again.

This is somewhat tough, I don't think I will be able to post half as much as I used to.
But in answer to Water Dragon's question... in all honesty I haven't studied enough of Kierkegaard's Christian guilt complex or Nietsche's uberman theory to really make any judgment on either of them. However if Nietsche's uberman theory resembles the "umgabun" of a lot of the various phenomenology writings, I would probably say that there is some truth in it, but there are many aspects that somewhat turn me off.
But as far as those two theories, I haven't studied them enough to say

Take care,
Ryu

[Water Dragon]

Ryu, you gots to check out existensialism. It's about as deep as it gets as far as western philosophy goes. The Uberman, or superman, is a philosophical paradox that Nietsche uses to explain his views. In essence it has to do with a godlike persona who is so happy with his own existence that given the chance, he would choose to not change one second of his life. Nietsche compares this to the "average" man, whose life is full of regret and compares the two in an effort to explain the human thought process.

Kierkegaard, on the other hand was a devout Christian who attempts to explain the psyche in reference to man's fall from grace (the garden of Eden story) and other biblical happenings. His main premise is built around the guilt inherent in us all based on those events and an attempt to reconcile ourselves with God.

Much better than logic 101, don't ya think? Be sure and check out Taoism if you get a chance to study Eastern philosophy. It's deep too.

[Ryu (non-working password]

Hi Water Dragon, I didn't know you were so well versed in the subject
I'm heading into a lot of the existentialist thought at this point. Phenomenology is not really exact existentialism, but definately seems to pull from it. Husserl, and Maurice Ponty are some of the writers I'm delving into right now. Though I am trying to understand it on a deeper level before I make any judgments. Taoism I have studied also, but am more into the ideals of Kong Fuzi (or Confucious as we call him).
So much to learn, and so many different views. The pieces of knowledge that can be pulled are immense. So I do enjoy it, though I am sometimes up late with a headache
Since you are a CMA practitioner, have you studied a lot of the eastern philosophies? Say Confucious, Mozi, Dong Zhongshou, and such? (I guess they were a little bit on the politcal side of things too, but still great thinkers)

I'll try to get back to you when I can.
Take care,

Ryu

[Water Dragon]

When talking about Eastern philosophy, you must take into account that the disciplines span thousands of years and so they take in many facets and the borders are extremely blurry in some places.

As a general rule, I find that Confucianism focus on the welfare of the state through a strict familial role. That is, there are definate roles and protocol that must be followed to maintain order in society. These codes of conduct begin with the family and extend outward through town, province and at the highest level the country. In this context Confucious tries to graft the bond onto the country by placing members of society into the various familial roles. Mainly by putting the emperor and court into the patriarchil and matriarchil positions and the people into the various roles of the children. (Which are also defined as to order of birth in Chinese society) This extends to CMA in that the relationship between students and teachers is still viewed as a semi-familial unit.

Taoism tries to explain things in the basic idea that there is a natural order to things. This is the Tao. Even though we cannot understand the Tao, by letting go of our ego and becoming free from both fear and desire, we can become on with this law and fulfill our natural purpose. Taoism has been famous throughout Chinese history for holding great influence over the aristocracy. Emporers who followed the "Tao" have always been considered wise to the Chinese while those who ignored it have been considered foolish. In contrast to Confucianism, Taoism places little regard for good/evil, right/wrong but teaches that each is important and has it's place.

Notice how in contrast to Western thought, Eastern philosophy places more emphasis on influencing thought than simply trying to explain it.

[Ryu (non-working password]

That's actually a very interesting point about Chinese philosophy trying to influence thought more so than trying to explain it. That's possibly why I seem a bit drawn to it on a more personal level then some of the western philosophies.
You're right on that matter. Confucious placed a great deal of emphasis on the matters of rites, filial piety, and humaneness. It is writings on humaneness, and the "junzi" that have me fascinated.
Taoism seems to sometimes compliment Confucian ideals, but at the same time might be taken as a work that is opposing as well. The Tao is very hard to actually grasp, and it is very easy to fall into a trap of interpreting it incorrectly, or with the wrong idea in mind. So for myself, I am trying to really ponder the underlining meanings that I can find. But then again "What is spoken of the Way is not the constant Way" so why even study Taoism then? haha
The only thing that seems to turn me off is what you mentioned also about how there is not a big emphasis on right and wrong/good and evil. As the forum knows already, I have very strong opinions on the notion of rightness. What's right, and wrong. I'm obviously not saying that some of our notions of morality change with knowledge. There have been plenty of things deemed "moral" that are now deemed "immoral" because of knowledge. Take "witch burning" for example. However the one thing I'm somewhat scared of is that some could take that to an extreme, where the philosophy of "there is no right or wrong, don't judge anything" comes into play. That I feel is wrong, and somewhat of a perversion of what things like Taoism, and phenomenology are saying. At an extreme level you could see a society who no longer condemns rape and murder because "there is no right and wrong, and it's not good to judge". What would follow would be the collapse of that society. (Since there would be no laws)
So I think human compassion plays a little role on what all humans feel is univerally "right" or "wrong". Even though many of us have different views on many matters.
But again, Zhoungzi, Mozi, Confucious, even the Legalists of ancient China all were pondering the concept of good and evil. So I guess that at least says something about the concepts.

That's it for me today, I have an exam I'm studying for.
I'll try to see you guys next week.

Take care,
Ryu

[Ronin]

Ouch!

All this thinking is hurting my brain!

Maybe I'll go back to the Underground.

[Ryu (non-working password]

oops, I meant to write "I'm obviously not saying that our notion of morality doesn't change with knowledge."


Ronin, I get the joy of waking up to this kind of thing everyday now...LOL
maybe I need to get back to the underground myself

Ryu

[Water Dragon]

I wouldn't see that as the case with Taoism, simply because many of the writings are directed to the leaders. A good example is that Taoist writings say many times that the best ruler both rewards lavishly and punishes viciously. The statement itself alludes that laws are necesary. Wherew it gets confusing for me, is the motivating factor. There is a "Tao" but we can't understand it (Who can know God's will?) But we are still held accountable for it. In some instances it is relatively easy, i.e. It is not good to kill another man for sport but it is okay if he is trying to take your life. Those two situations are more or less cut and dry. But when you start moving away from extremes and more toward the center is when it becomes difficult. So to me, the central question in Taoism at this point would be "At what point is it no longer acceptable to kill a man?"

If a man threatens to kill you or your wife, and you think he may be serious, Do you kill him to protect your family or leave it as he has done no wrong yet? That is more of a Taoist type question. That's also why Taoism expounds letting go of the ego. If your emotions get in the way of that question, How can you follow the Tao?