We STILL need a philosophy forum

I see no reason why those who wish to indulge should not have a Philosophy thread, sort of Birds of a Feather...Philosophise Together.

Yes, G2, maybe philosophy would not raise as many hackles as discussion on specific examples. It would be nice to think so.

I am glad to hear that my explanation made my position clearer.

I think therefore I am.

Existing isn't the same as thinking.

AHHHHH Grumppa A drinking Forum - now that's a post I can understand Thankyou

Meanwhile there seem to be several dedicated Philosophy forums elsewhere online.

I don"t like the swearing,bad language, or personal attacks on F"Ms .

I agree with that and it always lets down the person who can't think of something to say without sinking to the level of using bad language.

littleflo

Am I the only person on Gransnet who does not know what a Philosophy Forum is? I have read all the posts and am none the wiser. Is there any one out there who can explain in words suitable for a "Flo of very little brain"

IMO, it is more about logic. Philosphy covers many areas but I'll have a go at giving examples (this is quite a common one):

Should we kill healthy people for their organs?

John is a healthy man without family or loved ones. Would it be ok to painlessly kill him if his organs would save five people. If not, why not?

You are in the driver's cab of a runaway train and see five people tied to the track ahead who will be killed if the train continues on it's current track. You have the option of sending the train on to the track to the left, on which only one person is tied. Which track would you choose?

If you choose the track to the left, where only one person is tied, then why not kill John?

___________________________________________________

What makes an action or person morally good or evil?

___________________________________________________

True or False?

As the pursuit of wisdom, philosophy raises questions about almost everything except what it means to question in the first place.

Because philosophy requires that we question our beliefs, it cannot provide reasons why one set of beliefs should be preferred over another.

___________________________________________________

Hope that helps

Just read a very interesting article in the Guardian about four professors at Cambridge. They are founders of the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk and are looking into low probability but high consequence events.
One of them is a philosophy don, and is worried about the fact that computers will soon outwit us.
The astronomer royal worries that biotechnology will fall into the wrong hands.
All very interesting, philosophically.

I worry about both of those things, too. I worry for England sometimes, I think.

My computer outwits me quite often when I play cards against it, so I'm sure it won't be long before a more sophisticated computer tries to take over the world!

Holly Thanks for those examples, but what exactly is the point of all this philosophizing. Where does it get anyone?
Serious questions, as I too may be of very little brain.

LONA, join the club !!

Philosophy does not have to get you anywhere.
It's possible just to enjoy thinking, whatever size your brain.

But how do you know that, durhamjen?

You only know that you, personally, enjoy thinking with whatever-sized brain you have.

If you go for a walk, you are aiming to get somewhere, even if it is only a point where you will turn round and come back. If you go to the gym, you don't expect to arrive somewhere different after exercising, but your muscles will be stronger, and you have probably lost some unwanted flab.

Exercise is good for the mind as well as the body. Thinking hard increases the number of connections in the brain, and makes it work better. Discussing abstract ideas is gym for the mind. It strengthens the thinking muscles and untangling theoretical problems can get rid of some flabby ways of approaching practical questions too.

There should be a comma between "thinking muscles" and "and". Makes more sense to have a short pause there.

Logic/philosophy point - Even if DurhamJen were the only person in the world who enjoyed thinking with whatever-sized brain she has, that is enough for her to know that it is possible.

That's why I say it is possible, Ana. I did not say it was possible for everyone. I would not dream of answering for you, whatever the size of your brain.

Maybe I'm a lazy thinker, Elegran, and my thinking stays on the same spot. Actually, I used to be accused of too much lateral thinking, although I do not believe you can have too much of that. Lateral thinking quite often solves problems that others cannot.

Thanks, Ele. My point exactly.

Lateral thinking is another form of brain exercise which forms more connections and makes use of them to get to conclusions which are not always accessible to those who only travel forward and back.

That probably means my brain gets more exercise than my body. I'll have to tell my GP that next time she asks how much exercise I get.

At what point does lateral thinking become random association and total chaos and madness? Another question for philosophising.

Come to think of it, I would say a philosophy topic is an absolute necessity for Gransnet, woudn't you?

Definitely. How else do we find out what philosophy really is?

The other two people in the article in the Guardian were one of the men who invented Skype, who believes that machines are not entirely human-friendly, and an economics professor who thinks that our generation is dangerously shortsighted about the planet, as we are disturbing nature. His idea of sustainability is nothing like other economists. He is concerned about inequalities and natural capital.

Both those ideas are worth pursuing.

But durhamen would not be able to say that it was possible to enjoy thinking 'whatever size your brain', as she can only speak for her own brain, Elegran.