Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Locked
Philosofer123
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:21 am

Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Philosofer123 »

Over the past few years, I have formulated my philosophy of life, which may be found by Googling "Philo Sofer" and following the first link ("My Philosophy by Philo Sofer").

I am posting my philosophy to solicit feedback so that it may be improved. I welcome any constructive criticism that you may have.

Enjoy!
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

The main problem I have with it is not as much the content, at times a very tight summary of classic wisdom, but the fact that it's not actually your philosophy. If the result of having collected all these reasonable point of views is this long shopping list, then you do not have a philosophy of life. You have solved a puzzle, at best. It doesn't address life in all its chaotic, unpredictable, uncontrollable ways. It did help you to make this list of about-thought, make you feel more at peace after having created it and now what? In the end your philosophy appears decadent, perhaps even true but still dead. The way you distributed it to the world like a leaflet in the manner of a spammer, voids all possibility of life to my mind. And the goal of life pursuing happiness? It won't shock anyone, for sure.

In the end the document serves as justifier of what you think and how you desire to live. That makes it not a philosophy of life but a philosophy of you and some desire to package life. Of course it's true to form: you aim for peace of mind, for happiness. And the document serves that aim. A fine closed loop.

The question is if you'll hear this critique. Because you included the disclaimer that one should "not dwell on the negative aspects". This is not a way to grow towards philosophy in my view.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by ardy »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:The main problem I have with it is not as much the content, at times a very tight summary of classic wisdom, but the fact that it's not actually your philosophy. If the result of having collected all these reasonable point of views is this long shopping list, then you do not have a philosophy of life. You have solved a puzzle, at best. It doesn't address life in all its chaotic, unpredictable, uncontrollable ways. It did help you to make this list of about-thought, make you feel more at peace after having created it and now what? In the end your philosophy appears decadent, perhaps even true but still dead. The way you distributed it to the world like a leaflet in the manner of a spammer, voids all possibility of life to my mind. And the goal of life pursuing happiness? It won't shock anyone, for sure.

In the end the document serves as justifier of what you think and how you desire to live. That makes it not a philosophy of life but a philosophy of you and some desire to package life. Of course it's true to form: you aim for peace of mind, for happiness. And the document serves that aim. A fine closed loop.

The question is if you'll hear this critique. Because you included the disclaimer that one should "not dwell on the negative aspects". This is not a way to grow towards philosophy in my view.
Diebert: Fine post and very well put as it places many of us in a living box. The basis of discovering your own philosophy is a lot of introspection and some deep understanding of yourself and human nature. Not many people have that.
Philosofer123
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:21 am

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Philosofer123 »

Please note that as the purpose of this thread is to improve my philosophy, I will respond only to those posts whose authors appear both able and willing to engender specific improvements to the document.

Thank you for your understanding.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Philosofer123 wrote:Please note that as the purpose of this thread is to improve my philosophy, I will respond only to those posts whose authors appear both able and willing to engender specific improvements to the document.
The purpose of my reply was to improve your philosophy and not to improve the document. Which benefit do you see in improving the document? But here's an attempt to improve it: if tomorrow slimy aliens invade the Earth and start enslaving and torturing everybody, how would that effect your doctrine? Bottom line is that philosophy should be valid outside the box or bubble you happen to vacate in right now. Only then we can talk about doing philosophy.
Philosofer123
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:21 am

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Philosofer123 »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:
Philosofer123 wrote:Please note that as the purpose of this thread is to improve my philosophy, I will respond only to those posts whose authors appear both able and willing to engender specific improvements to the document.
But here's an attempt to improve it: if tomorrow slimy aliens invade the Earth and start enslaving and torturing everybody, how would that effect your doctrine?
It would not affect my philosophy at all.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Well alright then, you probably would try to sit it out as "it will pass like everything else". But your philosophy might show in those circumstances its nihilism.

Here's another one
  • Since neither the past nor the future currently exist, they should not negatively affect one’s present state of mind
Doesn't go well with
  • Of course, while living in the present, one may still learn from the past and prepare for the future
A past that's still there to "learn" from and a future worthwhile to "prepare for". There can hardly be any better acknowledgement of how past and future function, how they exist commonly. The moment you try to learn from it or it's informing you, it's present and the moment you prepare, the future lives now. You want it both ways as long as they don't bother you?

Thanks for engaging though.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

That means in the event of slimy aliens showing up your philosophy has them always/already accounted for.
You are confidently declaring in the event of anything showing up at all you have it covered.
how do you account for your philosophy showing up.
what happened?
Last edited by Dennis Mahar on Thu Dec 05, 2013 8:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
Philosofer123
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:21 am

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Philosofer123 »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Well alright then, you probably would try to sit it out as "it will pass like everything else". But your philosophy might show in those circumstances its nihilism.

Here's another one
  • Since neither the past nor the future currently exist, they should not negatively affect one’s present state of mind
Doesn't go well with
  • Of course, while living in the present, one may still learn from the past and prepare for the future
A past that's still there to "learn" from and a future worthwhile to "prepare for". There can hardly be any better acknowledgement of how past and future function, how they exist commonly. The moment you try to learn from it or it's informing you, it's present and the moment you prepare, the future lives now. You want it both ways as long as they don't bother you?

Thanks for engaging though.
Thank you for your comments.

The fact that one may learn from the past and prepare for the future is perfectly consistent with the fact that neither the past nor the future currently exist. In fact, by definition, the past and the future do not currently exist. And with a disciplined mind, one may both learn from the past and prepare for the future without their negatively affecting one's present state of mind.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by ardy »

Philosofer123 Diebert is right. There is no sense in putting together a document as a tablet from the mount of your own high level likes and dislikes. There are fundamental questions that need to be answered and that is not going to come from a list of philosophies you admire. It is important to read and understand others ideas but it takes you nowhere in terms of who you are.

I think you are bullshitting yourself if you think your philosophical world would not adapt to a Hitler taking over your country. We live in a world of action and life not a dead document. Education is one thing, understanding something entirely different.

If you post here then you must accept what you get. If you only want people to add to your list of life, then take it to a university department.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Philosofer123 wrote: The fact that one may learn from the past and prepare for the future is perfectly consistent with the fact that neither the past nor the future currently exist. In fact, by definition, the past and the future do not currently exist. And with a disciplined mind, one may both learn from the past and prepare for the future without their negatively affecting one's present state of mind.
Well, yes, by definition the past and the future are not now: the past is where we learn from and the future is what we prepare for. But activities both are being engaged in now so the past and future do exist practically (but not metaphysically) by your definition of continuing to learn and prepare. It's meaningless to say the past currently doesn't exist as present. What you are talking about looks more like attachment to learning (past) or preparation (future). Then what tries to exist is "self" which can be discussed without contradiction.

With a disciplined mind a lot is possible. Actually I'd suggest mind is a form of discipline already.
Philosofer123
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:21 am

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Philosofer123 »

Please note that I have revised the "Negative hedonism" section of the document.

I have also added a new section entitled "Beyond peace of mind".

I look forward to any feedback you may have.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Existence does not "come to an end" due to the passing of certain formations/appearances (i.e the body/brain). Existence is not dependent on these particular appearances. So change that part of the document.

It's not that hard to grasp, there is no self substance, possession, quality or formation, and definitely no thing of any self that is lasting, hence there is nothing of 'you' that is perishable. (Subject to an end)

Again, the impermanence of that which is not you(appearances/formations) has nothing to do with your existence.
Philosofer123
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:21 am

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Philosofer123 »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:Existence does not "come to an end" due to the passing of certain formations/appearances (i.e the body/brain). Existence is not dependent on these particular appearances. So change that part of the document.

It's not that hard to grasp, there is no self substance, possession, quality or formation, and definitely no thing of any self that is lasting, hence there is nothing of 'you' that is perishable. (Subject to an end)

Again, the impermanence of that which is not you(appearances/formations) has nothing to do with your existence.
With which specific statement(s) in the document do you disagree?

Please QUOTE those statements, and explain exactly why you believe they are mistaken.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

It won't let me copy paste so, afterlife skepticism dot point #2 starting with "there is no reliable".

Your assumption is based solely upon what you term as "scientific evidence", which is really a very useless argument, especially since you have (I assume) never undertaken many, if not all of these experiments. I would call it evidence that certain people completely misunderstand the way in which the body exists, forgetting philosophy and in doing so making huge philosophical assumptions. (Philosophical assumptions which are not related to those tests at all)
User avatar
Fox
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 9:02 pm

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Fox »

Philosophy, is not a Life. It's a plan.
User avatar
Fox
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 9:02 pm

Re: Critique My Philosophy of Life?

Post by Fox »

Welcome, to My Horizon.
Locked