Philosophy, fandom and football

[MakemineVanilla]

2 hours ago, mjmooney said:

Philosophy, you say? OK, let's start with Pythagoras. The first three rules of the Pythagorean Order were: 

1. Never eat beans 

2. Never pick up what has fallen 

3. Never touch a white cock 

I kid you not. 

I've been reading Russell lately and he gives the whole list, all of which seem equally abitrary.

And, Pythagoras learned his theorem from the Egyptians.

[Marka Ragnos]

12 hours ago, fruitvilla said:

By all means, this was never meant to be absolutely inclusive, of all three ... philosophy, fandom and football. Having said that there is much that I disagree philosophically with fan's opinions of football.

With the little of the second-hand/third-hand stuff I have come across of Heidegger and Wittgenstein, I may not be on board with them. Adorno .. don't remember coming across this philosopher.

I’ve been trying to get a better sense of the big philosophical discussions, and also movements in psychology, in the lead-up to and right after the Holocaust and fascist ascendancy.  So far, in my explorations, Heidegger and later existentialism don’t come off well.  Heidegger’s thinking, especially, seems to dovetail way too easily with Nazi ideology.  Of course, he was literally a Nazi, so that explains some of it.

7 hours ago, mjmooney said:

Philosophy, you say? OK, let's start with Pythagoras. The first three rules of the Pythagorean Order were: 

1. Never eat beans 

2. Never pick up what has fallen 

3. Never touch a white cock 

I kid you not. 

There is no proper come back to that one. If I look it up on Google, I’m going to feel the fool. If I don’t look it up on Google, I’m going to be thinking about it for the next month.  

[fruitvilla]

6 hours ago, MakemineVanilla said:

I've been reading Russell lately and he gives the whole list, all of which seem equally abitrary.

Interesting, I think ... a couple of examples? And perhaps a reference to look up?

[fruitvilla]

2 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I’ve been trying to get a better sense of the big philosophical discussions, and also movements in psychology, in the lead-up to and right after the Holocaust and fascist ascendancy.  So far, in my explorations, Heidegger and later existentialism don’t come off well.  Heidegger’s thinking, especially, seems to dovetail way too easily with Nazi ideology.  Of course, he was literally a Nazi, so that explains some of it.

My particular main dish is free will, with side orders of epistemology and perhaps theology. Of course, the rest of the universe impinges on these and other philosophical discussions.

[Marka Ragnos]

15 minutes ago, fruitvilla said:

Of course, the rest of the universe impinges on these and other philosophical discussions.

I hear you. But what "world"? How do you know there's any "world"? And what is knowing? To paraphrase Boy George, "We are the world."

[fruitvilla]

2 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I hear you. But what "world"? How do you know there's any "world"? And what is knowing? To paraphrase Boy George, "We are the world."

Of course, you are right here (I think). I can't think of an argument to defeat solipsism (and perhaps idealism). But I think Schopenhauer was right when he said of solipsism: … a small frontier fortress. Admittedly the fortress is impregnable, but the garrison can never sally forth from it, therefore we can pass it by, and leave it in our rear without danger.

I tend to come down on the physicalist/materialist side of things. And of course, epistemology is all about what we can know.

[fruitvilla]

2 hours ago, QldVilla said:

I talked about unambitious people who work in mundane jobs and don’t have to try to hard and their job is never at risk

While I get your point here I do have some questions

1) Why would someone unnecessarily put their jobs at risk ... that is true for the vast majority of us is it not?
2) Half of us have an IQ below average, perhaps it is wise to stick to the short and narrow for many of us?
3) Being unambitious at work, might allow us to excel in other areas in our lives, eg posting on VT? 

[QldVilla]

56 minutes ago, fruitvilla said:

While I get your point here I do have some questions

1) Why would someone unnecessarily put their jobs at risk ... that is true for the vast majority of us is it not?
2) Half of us have an IQ below average, perhaps it is wise to stick to the short and narrow for many of us?
3) Being unambitious at work, might allow us to excel in other areas in our lives, eg posting on VT? 

1) there’s people who put their jobs at risk on a daily basis, not sure what your asking?

2) I haven’t referred to IQ my reference has always been regarding ambition and experience.

3) ambition is differ t for everybody those are people’s individual choices, not sure how it relates to anything I’ve stated.

[fruitvilla]

Just had to get out of the reactions Brentford thread.

There is so much nonsense there.

Out of curiosity, who believes in cause and effect? I do. Though I accept it might not be true. But assuming cause and effect are true, that leads to some inescapable if not uncomfortable positions. For example, today's draw with Brentford was inevitable. And all the moaning we have on today's Brentford thread is also inevitable.