Monthly Archives: January 2016

Plato Was Half-Right

In the Republic, Plato defined a philosopher firstly as an occupation: lover of wisdom. He then distinguishes between one who loves true knowledge (as opposed to mere experience or education) by saying that the philosopher is the only person who has access to ideas – the archetypal entities that exist behind all representations of the form (such as Beauty itself as opposed to any one particular instance of beauty).

It is next, and in support of the idea, that philosophers are the best rulers that Plato fashions within the Ship of State metaphor: a “true pilot must of necessity pay attention to the seasons, the heavens, the stars, the winds, and everything proper to the craft if he is really to rule a ship” (The Republic, 6.488d).

In Plato’s Republic, he talks about the philosopher, i.e. the ruling class of the time, to be the ruling class, while the merchants were born to control desire, and soldiers were born to be guardians; like obedient beasts knowing instinctually friend from foe.

Since reason is the dominant factor in this triad (reason, desire, guardianship) that Plato believes is the essence of any city/community, he argues that Philosophers should rule because, “philosophical minds always love knowledge of a sort which shows them the eternal nature not varying from generation and corruption.” A true lover of learning, which a philosopher is, must be truthful, for being untruthful would go against their love and their very being itself.

Now, while I do agree with Plato on many levels, I call into question here his understanding of the philosopher King, that they are natuarally from the high society.  I believe this is a tactic, similar to Machiavelli’s The Prince, where he wrote it for a specific audience in order to gain favor.

This is where Plato was Half-Right.

With that being said, I believe Plato’s interpretation of the Philosopher King, not dependent on gender mind you, to be one perfectly balanced in this triad that he spoke of, not reason being the dominant force. Again, I believe he was writing to those in high society, the only ones who could read, network, and purchase his work, but his words speak volumes for those in history to really be able to analyze what he said.

Plato comments that reason, desire and guardianship compose an individual within the city and the city itself, and that reason should dominate desire and guardianship.  It makes more sense to believe that Plato was hinting that the real Philosopher King was one balanced perfectly and at all times of reason, desire and guardianship.

Advertisements

The Confrontation of Our Consciousness With Our Existence

It is not about the terms man or woman, but about the human being and the way of being human.  “Seindes” is a way of being: senseless, absurd.

One can see how existentialism does not talk about the lack of meaning of or within  an idea, or of the meaning of God, but of the way that things have of being.  Things are absurd because they are here without doing anything.  They are as they are.  They have no history.  They are not in time, though they can deteriorate in time, undergoing this passively.  The “Sein,” to be meaningful, significant.  The “Da-Sein,” gives meaning to the being of things.

In the first place, it is an affirmation of being human.  Secondly, it is about giving meaning and value to things; a creation of the Other, using external things to create an internal meaning to things.

MC-PS
“Metatron’s Cube-Platonic Solids” by Jared Tarbell, (CC BY 2.0)

 

We do not have limits.  We cannot say where a table ends and where the floor begins, because in truth, it is always about matter composed of atoms; the reciprocation between energy, vibration and rotation.  Energy for Einstein was nothing more than a curvature in space, and the thing is a definite thing because humans define the things boundaries.  Human’s view things within their necessity and within the human’s plans (even by the limits of their biology).  Therefore, the “Da-Sein” the higher being, existence, forms a higher being which rightly is a significant being, a human being, an existence.

Heidegger says that absurd existence is ontic, while meaningful, higher existence leads to ontology.  Heidegger continues that human existence is not a definite thing. Even moreso, there are no models of man; i.e. no archetypes of a modern human being.  Mainly because one can only say through action they are a human, being; they achieve themselves as human existence.  A total freedom to choose a banal or authentic existence.

If Philosophy is an act of existence, then the Philospher is one in life; One amid the torrential vibrational currents of eternity.

Where Does Too Little Concern Lead?

There has been too little concern lately with what is right and good and more about what will bring individual wealth and power.  When there is a lack of empathy, transparency and oversight, the democratic process cannot occur.  If the democratic process does not occur as objectivity as sacred ritual, then the public forum and public opinion does not operate in an operation method; i.e. without an archetype.

If there is no organizational method to fall back on and be used to reassure individual organizations of ethical behavior, inherent biases will always be glossed over and not taken seriously.  If inherent biases are not affirmed, actively or passively, then dialogue will only lead to incoherent discourse.  Incoherent discourse directly relates with too little concern with that is right no good by demonstrating a lack of respect, kindness, understanding and Ya-Gordi.

Ya-Gordi is a balance between patience and passion, competition and collaboration, between reason, desire and guardianship, too include sunyata, an existential Self or Taoist Way, an intrinsic value coupled with personal responsibility, an understanding of the Dasein as well as the Social Contract.

This lack of respect, kindness, understanding and Ya-Gordi, and therefore balance between the physical, intellectual and spiritual, leads to that which will bring opportunities for individual wealth and power.

In a Western model, yes, and individual/hierarchical ideology could work, which could be argued as very proficient, profitable, and industrious; as long as there is transparency, oversight and trust.

The Democratic Process does not, will not ever, work as objectivity as sacred ritual, if the concepts of transparency, oversight and trust are trampled upon.  Therefore the public forum and public opinion will not operate within an organizational method;  no methodological archetypes, inherent biases are not affirmed, and incoherent dialogue runs rampant.

Amix a jumble of generational, morally-loaded, archaic terms, text and speech; there are those attempting to define the masculine and feminine without living it.

Contractual Revolution

After careful analysis of the language of contracts, and the intimate experience of always being on the receiving end of the terms of agreements and inherent stipulations of being a leasee and not a lessor for decades, it is safe to say that the average person is exponentially legally and ethically underhanded by the system that is set up to legally and ethically take advantage of the average person.

The term average person exhibits a no to little celebrity status, those unfamiliar with legalese, and are not included in the “boys clubs” that run rampant in politics, industry, academia, and the military.

If there was not a hidden agenda going on within this military-industrial-educational complex, why is there such a feeling of vulnerability to authority? Where is the oversight and transparency that is supposed to accompany the ethical practice of being a celebrity, of interacting with the public in such a way that your interactions should be overseen and transparent?

Those with this celebrity status should not be able to take advantage of people, be the only ones protected by this contractual understanding, or protected just because the position of authority grants certain supposed rights and protections.  People, for example the leasee, should carry just as many rights over those who do politics, business, education, or military action in their name, but also transparency and oversight.

Also, a closing of the loopholes that those who create the contracts use to purposefully take advantage of people needs to occur, and a way to make sure puffery is not used to sell an item or fraud is not occurring on such a mass scale, contractual agreements should be implemented just as firmly for the people as those who hold the celebrity status.

Average people who do not hold the celebrity status should have a contract with the authoritative that is as secure in court as those who use contracts currently have; people will be oppressed legally and ethically, and the authorities in this world will not be held accountable if this continues.

What the name means

Phenawecellentasticalfulness is a moment in time, a physical connection to the present.  Gottfried Leibniz once wrote about a theoretical scientific concept that is attempting to be proven today, the Monad. The moment where non-physical matter becomes physical matter.  Well, in the tradition of Leibniz, Phenawecellentasticalfulness is a moment were linguistics and society merge, and form an understanding of what is being said or perceived in a linguistical manner.

Some people can act without thinking, for many others they put their actions or reactions into a linguistical manner; a semiotic understanding of verbal alchemy; verbal and non-verbal language.

Simply, this term represents a moment in time where and when linguistical comprehension takes place.  Where someone “gets” what is going on in a semiotic way.  Mind you no action has to take place, yet an understanding is occurring where no action is an action, all is vibration, and this understanding right now is exactly what this guy is talking about.