Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

Thinking of Becoming a Philosopher

ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 10:48:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I need to know what all I need to do to actually know how to think philosophically. Like what are some terms I should look into. Is philosophy's ideas from the thinker's head? If so, I have a couple ideas I think are original, but i'm not quite sure if that's the case. If anybody can help, i'd appreciate it. I also hope to join this forum and discuss philosophy with y'all as I might go down a career involving philosophy. Thank you all. :3
Dazz
Posts: 1,163
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 4:53:05 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 10:48:50 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I need to know what all I need to do to actually know how to think philosophically. Like what are some terms I should look into. Is philosophy's ideas from the thinker's head? If so, I have a couple ideas I think are original, but i'm not quite sure if that's the case. If anybody can help, i'd appreciate it. I also hope to join this forum and discuss philosophy with y'all as I might go down a career involving philosophy. Thank you all. :3

Take an apple, eat it, then think over it, have you really eaten the Apple? Question yourself again and again, fight over it, or dip your watch in boiling water and hold an egg to watch the time, rethink and keep this process on, one day you would see, you're a philosopher :) Just kidding lol Let anyone answer it in philosophical term that would produce counter fallacy of defining the definition rofl sorry for my trolling, I hope it was a sweet answer and you must like it ;)
Remove the "I want", remainder is the "peace". ~Al-Ghazali~
"This time will also pass", a dose to cure both; the excitement & the grievance. ~Ayaz~
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 7:25:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 10:48:50 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I need to know what all I need to do to actually know how to think philosophically. Like what are some terms I should look into. Is philosophy's ideas from the thinker's head? If so, I have a couple ideas I think are original, but i'm not quite sure if that's the case. If anybody can help, i'd appreciate it. I also hope to join this forum and discuss philosophy with y'all as I might go down a career involving philosophy. Thank you all. :3

Tell us your couple of ideas you think are original.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 8:39:31 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 7:25:08 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 8/10/2014 10:48:50 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I need to know what all I need to do to actually know how to think philosophically. Like what are some terms I should look into. Is philosophy's ideas from the thinker's head? If so, I have a couple ideas I think are original, but i'm not quite sure if that's the case. If anybody can help, i'd appreciate it. I also hope to join this forum and discuss philosophy with y'all as I might go down a career involving philosophy. Thank you all. :3

Tell us your couple of ideas you think are original.

1. I call it the Monkey's Paw Law or the Paw Law. It's just like the actual story where if a sentence or question is stated not too specific then there's many approaches. The way to use this law is to think of the following example. You could ask a creationist or evolutionist their evidences for their claims (btw, though I'm Christian, I'm against creationism.). The following could happen.

1. They start with a question. "What evidence?" "What specific evidence would you like to know?"

2. They'll either focus on a specific part for a while, almost never stopping. They'll explain in seconds. Maybe they'll break it down to make it easy.

3. Creationists most likely will use the bible or claims that design of human beings, male and female, is proof.

It's a way to assume things using memory, reasoning and foretelling. The father in the story uses this for the second wish. He finds out that if the son is alive, then the wife was not specific and he could have the following.

1. A deformed face.

2. Maybe a face and specifics aren't needed, but unlikely.

3. A demon or angel from its afterlife that represents the son.

4. A zombie who would eat People.

Different scenarios can come about the more you put your mind to it. It's much easier to use in strong situations and not so dangerous ones. The other thing is, this can help assume the past by not just thinking of our modern usage of things, but by understanding history and other cultures, we can learn more of the past by observing.

2. Sherlock's Law of Possibilities. I developed this as a kid when working on a survival art called Human Weapon. I would focus on the defense tactics after watching the new movies of Sherlock Holmes. It showed that he would use his logic of the anatomy of human beings to find perfect weak spots as well as likely attacks. While I believe the humans have free will, the will can be predictable if you use your logic correctly. For example it started with watching a fight at school between a jock and a nerd. The nerd dodges the first punch and I could see it coming. The jock was known for that punch. So if I could avoid it, I could get a window of several openings. If pants were allowed to let me, hard punch to the groin. Maybe I could rise up with an uppercut. If I had time after the punch, get up and punch for the throat. Of I can wait and find other opportunities. The difference between the first and second logic laws is that Paw Law predicts the future entirely, while Sherlock's only provides possible options with no real future foretelling after the options (unless you've seen results before). This also follows up soft what I call, the reward and punishment. There may be a positive reward like satisfaction or cheers from the non jock crowd. But punishment from faculty and future bullying from the jock could occur. I doubt this is original, but the concept of actions containing rewards AND punishments is very common.

And that's my two cents.
Truth_seeker
Posts: 1,811
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 8:48:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 10:48:50 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I need to know what all I need to do to actually know how to think philosophically. Like what are some terms I should look into. Is philosophy's ideas from the thinker's head? If so, I have a couple ideas I think are original, but i'm not quite sure if that's the case. If anybody can help, i'd appreciate it. I also hope to join this forum and discuss philosophy with y'all as I might go down a career involving philosophy. Thank you all. :3

Just know how to use logic. Learn about the different kinds of beliefs in philosophy, but more importantly, don't count on looking stuff up online. Philosophy isn't about sources or about what philosopher said what. Philosophy isn't a science or literature, philosophy is the art of thinking. Forget about philosophy books, a "how to" guide, etc. be creative and think about your own ideas. Use your own logic.
NicholasPiva
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 10:11:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
A philosopher is simply a person who thinks about life. Unbeknownst to us all, we all have a mind that is capable of this feat, and most do, proving most of us are philosophers. However, they are usually not conscious of this.

I would recommend that you keep a journal, and everywhere you go write. Any spark of inspiration, whether it be about the innate human nature or the conception of the world, write about it. This forces you to organize your thoughts onto paper and then you have the latticework to look back on your thoughts.

A philosopher's notebook is one of profound knowledge, a personalized aggregate of esoteric information pertaining to the individual. Over time, you will develop ironclad views by reading a diverse amount of books and first-hand experiences.

Remember, the most sagacious men believed reading is in direct correlation with success. Learning vicariously will save you time and more importantly, it will expose you to novel perceptions from others in which you can personally evaluate.
Nicholas J. Piva
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2014 4:50:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 10:48:50 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I need to know what all I need to do to actually know how to think philosophically. Like what are some terms I should look into. Is philosophy's ideas from the thinker's head? If so, I have a couple ideas I think are original, but i'm not quite sure if that's the case. If anybody can help, i'd appreciate it. I also hope to join this forum and discuss philosophy with y'all as I might go down a career involving philosophy. Thank you all. :3

Think about stuff, there ya go, your a philosopher now.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12