My Philosopy

[oracle]

I've been trying to develop my own philosophy for the past two years. The purpose of this is to help me gather all my thoughts as I have not written all my ideas down. Please ask me any questions, in regards to life, ethics, religion, and spirituality. It would be of great help.

 

[Era]

Ok , let`s start with the creation of universe , who do you think create it , or what create it ?

 

[oracle]

Ok , let`s start with the creation of universe , who do you think create it , or what create it ?

My views on this tend to side with somewhat of the taoist and scientific perspective of the universe. Before the Big Bang is what we call a singularity, which is where neither spacetime or matter existed: complete nothingness. When a person thinks of nothingness, they think of empty space, however this is when space itself did not exist. From this was rapid inflation of spacetime and matter untill the universe expanded to the point where it is now today. I believe that God is not an actual entity, but is the personification of this component. God is unity, where all things are unified and whole, which is what the singularity is. It is infinite and eternal. God becomes an entity when we personalize God in the subjective human mind. However on an objective level God is not literallly an entity, but everything that exists, [everything that was caused by the singularity and the singularity itself].

 

[Majikthise]

How do you treat other people?

 

[Green Gaia]

What is the cause of "evil" and suffering?

 

[michel]

[PART QUOTE=oracle]My views on this tend to side with somewhat of the taoist and scientific perspective of the universe. Before the Big Bang is what we call a singularity, which is where neither spacetime or matter existed: complete nothingness. When a person thinks of nothingness, they think of empty space, however this is when space itself did not exist. From this was rapid inflation of spacetime and matter untill the universe expanded to the point where it is now today.[/QUOTE]Hi; your thread was to say the least, asking for trouble you know. Saying 'ask me anything' is not the sort of stand I would dare make.

On your particular point above though, I am happy with what you have said, except that you have no explanation for what I have highlighted in red, followed by .....from this... I 'go along' with your logic, in which you marry taoism and science, but there is an element missing.... isn't there?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Does the law of non-contradiction apply in your philosophy?

 

[Era]

Thank you for answering Oracle , you`ll see it won`t be that hard to find you`re own philosophy ! I have to say that you have an interesting system going from existentialism ( nothing becomes something) , pantheism ( God is everything) to rationalism .

 

[Scuba Pete]

Well, I just have to ask:

WHY???​

:biglaugh:​

 

[michel]

Thank you for answering Oracle , you`ll see it won`t be that hard to find you`re own philosophy ! I have to say that you have an interesting system going from existentialism ( nothing becomes something) , pantheism ( God is everything) to rationalism .

I'm not quite sure about your definition of existentialism; is that your own interpretation?

 

[Era]

There are three types of existentialism ( the big ones) , two extremes and one in the midle : Kierkegaard ( the christian existentialism ), Sartre ( the atheist one , is the one that says : our world came from nothing and the evolution brought something , when we are born , we are nothing , we become something by making choices , to this type I was reffering) and Heiddeger ( who combines them , it`s more a metaphisical existentialism .) Oracle mentioned that God becomes an entity when we personalise him . In existentialism ( outside the christian one) , there is no essence in things , they do exist when we think of them , because we give them a meaning . Is not my own interpretation on existentialism , but it is my interpretation on what Oracle said.

 

[oracle]

How do you treat other people?

With as much respect as possible. The problem is being aware of another person's needs, and you have to be aware of them and respect them, and part of respecting them is not to place your needs above theirs.

 

[Prima]

Here are a few questions philosophers through the ages have tried to answer:


Is there a natural right and wrong? (is there a universal standard for right and wrong, or does it depend on the situation? are there some things that will always be right/wrong?)

Is the material world real?

Do we see things as they really are?

Is there a 'right' and 'wrong' way to perceive things? (if I say something is pink and you say it's red, are one of us more right than the other?)

Which came first - the idea of something, or the thing itself? (does my mind have the idea of a dog before I see a dog?)

Can we ever reach truth, where we have no more questions about the universe?

Is reason better than faith? is it more reliable?

 

[oracle]

What is the cause of "evil" and suffering?

First of all, suffering is an essential part of life. On a psychological aspect pain, fear, and anger provides us the necassary capability to react to hostilities in the environment. Without the capicity to suffer, nothing would survive. However there is much unecassary suffering created by us humans.
The ability to percieve evil, is the same ability to percieve a hostility in the evironment. The capicity to have morals is to fully recognize and be aware which actions inflict harm towards another being.
I believe that evil does not exist objectively, but is entirely subjective. The first realization is to recognize that evil is internal, not external. There are no demons and spirits, Satan is not a literal being but exists in the mind as pride/ignorance/selfishness. You are ultimately your worst enemy as you are completely responsible for every action you do that was intentionally harmful to another being, regardless of external influences.
I believe that evil originates in the mind as a limitation and deficiency called ignorance: lack of awareness, the inability to understand and sympathize with another person's needs. It is then influenced by our emotions and desires, resulting in selfishness. I believe that emotions are survival mechanism and are always self-referential, even the emotion of love can really be self-love. I percieve that emotions can be the driving force of evil actions, while ignorance or the lack of understanding and logic is the vehicle from which all destructive behavior stems.
What makes an action evil, are selfish motives. Telling the truth is evil if it was meant to hurt somebody. It's not the works but the motives that count. Evil originates in the heart and mind, and then becomes externalized and objectively real.
To turn from evil is to be aware of our true spirituality, that we are whole and unified. To externalize this unity gives fruit to true love, which is not necassarily emotional love, but a word describing unity. Love is truely the ability to go beyond your own self, and first that comes from undeserstanding, and sympathizing with other's needs. However we should not completely lose our self-referentiality, but understand where we would be crossing the line, that is when our actions cause harm towards others. We should require respect from others in a peaceful manner. Love is also not percieving others as being evil in a discriminant manner, but knowing that these people are lacking in their wholeness, unity, and completeness with the rest of the world.
It is when we act destructively towards others, knowing that these actions are harmful that results in true evil. This leads to alienation and division with others. Sometimes we make mistakes called sin, but it's not always necassarily evil but caused by ignorance and lack of being aware. Thus you are not fully accountable. These sins do not lead to division, but mistakes are completely inevitable due to the limitations of the mind. You are born with no memories or experiences, therefore when you are born you are lacking in a database in which you interpret your surroundings and environment from, leading to fallacies and misconceptions. Evil is not absolute but temporal. Evil does not originate in our objective reality, but our subjective reality. Again, when it becomes externalized through our actions, then it becomes somewhat objectively real. I believe that God is amoral in which moralities do not apply. We are the ones who create moral standards, as this function exists for survival reasons, primarily in our co-existent relationships with others.

 

[oracle]

Bahhh... I'll write a better and more extensive analysis behind the origin of evil sometime later. My views on this are from a psychological and evolutionary perspective. Perhaps if I have time, I will show the original and supportive sources from where my philosophy/theory stems.

 

[oracle]

Does the law of non-contradiction apply in your philosophy?

I try to rid my idealogy from contradiction as much as possible. I don't think anybody's perceptions on life are flawless, but consists of fallacies because of the limitations of the mind. Everyones contradicts themselves, even science has contradictions.

 

[oracle]

Here are a few questions philosophers through the ages have tried to answer:


Is there a natural right and wrong? (is there a universal standard for right and wrong, or does it depend on the situation? are there some things that will always be right/wrong?)

I think I've answered this question in one of my posts in this thread.

Is the material world real??)

Yes, it is real. I believe that the perception of it, the subjective mind is what is illusive in the way that a projection screen in a theater is illusive.

Do we see things as they really are?

In the mind's eye our perspectives are personal, however I think that a person's perspectives can be fallible , inaccurate, and unreliable do to our limitations of understanding.
With our sensory experiences, yes we see things as they really are according to the capacities of our sensory organs. However there is more than what the eye can see.

Is there a 'right' and 'wrong' way to perceive things? (if I say something is pink and you say it's red, are one of us more right than the other?)

Yes, when a persons perceptions become hostile to society, it becomes naturally and morally wrong. It really depends on the situation. For example, all truth on the other hand, cannot be fully grasped, so our perceptions on truth will always be endless in variety. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but when their opinions cross a certain line it becomes wrong. Then there is the accuracy and inaccuracy of a perceptive belief, when it is unrealistic and soley imaginative.

Which came first - the idea of something, or the thing itself? (does my mind have the idea of a dog before I see a dog?)

You only have an ideal of a dog from memory and sensory experiences of the dog. So our sensory experiences come first, then memory and recognition.

Can we ever reach truth, where we have no more questions about the universe?

No

Is reason better than faith? is it more reliable?

faith is not a bad thing, however it can be overexaggerated when superstitious reasoning replaces logical and rational reasoning. I think it would be better to converge science and religion.