Is Philosophy Merely Intellectual Self-Gratification?

[plum]

Our species has fought its way to the top of the food chain, and now it has nothing left to do. There is plenty of food for anyone who wants it, so where do we go from here? How can we use the faculties that the mad drive for dominance of the food chain has given us? We have long since won nature's war. What do we do now? Where is the motivation, when it is not to survive?

 

[Preator Fenix]

Dont be so quick to think we'e won pal. Nature STILL whops our collective asses.

 

[olde drunk]

Our species has fought its way to the top of the food chain, and now it has nothing left to do. There is plenty of food for anyone who wants it, so where do we go from here? How can we use the faculties that the mad drive for dominance of the food chain has given us? We have long since won nature's war. What do we do now? Where is the motivation, when it is not to survive?

the challenge is to get all that over abundance of food to all the people that are starving to death!

love&peace,
olde drunk

 

[False Prophet]

How can we use the faculties that the mad drive for dominance of the food chain has given us?

We use those faculties for the mad drive for money.

 

[wuliheron]

Our species has fought its way to the top of the food chain, and now it has nothing left to do. There is plenty of food for anyone who wants it, so where do we go from here? How can we use the faculties that the mad drive for dominance of the food chain has given us? We have long since won nature's war. What do we do now? Where is the motivation, when it is not to survive?

Fish ponds and starving people tend to have something in common. First their populations explode as they compete to exploit the available resources. Then their populations implode as the the available resources can no longer support their numbers. This cycle is repeated over and over again, and both the fish and the people adapt physiologically to the circumstances.

In the last hundred and fifty years the world's population has exploded from six million to six billion, and fourteen billion is the estimated upper limit of how many the world can support. Today the world's food researves are at an all time low since WWII, one third of the population is starving to death at any given moment, and another third is malnurished.

Prey tell, what ivory tower do you live into claim that food is no longer an influence in our evolution? What mastaborty philosophy do you ascribe to that implores you to make such outrageous claims?

 

[plum]

We use those faculties for the mad drive for money.

Yes, I guess so. We keep transcending more basic needs and become the ultra-species.

 

[ill rich]

Our species has fought its way to the top of the food chain, and now it has nothing left to do.

i don't think that's a fair statement at all. we still bow to storms, earthquakes, volcanism, meteorites, etc. we may be able to kill other living species but Earth's natural processes are still more effective than any method of war.

 

[Janitor]

...In the last hundred and fifty years the world's population has exploded from six million to six billion...

Can you double-check that statement? Six million sounds way too low to me for that era.

 

[Twistedseer]

http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldhis.html

He was only out by the "odd thousand million"

Twistedseer

 

[abitofnothingleft]

Fish ponds and starving people tend to have something in common. First their populations explode as they compete to exploit the available resources. Then their populations implode as the the available resources can no longer support their numbers. This cycle is repeated over and over again, and both the fish and the people adapt physiologically to the circumstances.

In the last hundred and fifty years the world's population has exploded from six million to six billion, and fourteen billion is the estimated upper limit of how many the world can support. Today the world's food researves are at an all time low since WWII, one third of the population is starving to death at any given moment, and another third is malnurished.

Prey tell, what ivory tower do you live into claim that food is no longer an influence in our evolution? What mastaborty philosophy do you ascribe to that implores you to make such outrageous claims?

very well said. i couldn't agree more.
also, we have not conquered everything plum. as predator fenix said before, we are still unable to control many things in nature. look at how many deaths occur because of hurricanes or such disasterous factors as those. humans have much to learn when it comes to life, the Earth and everything in general. and if you haven't noticed, there are still discoveries being made about the earth, diseases, disorders and other interesting things that we never thought possible. take a look around and you'll see that humans have had great victories in the past, but there are still many more challenges awaiting us. look at the state of the world itself. look at it and tell me honestly that nothing more needs to be done

 

[Microburst]

Where is the motivation, when it is not to survive?

Sanguine and false euphoria, what planet are you from plum I wana go there to…
We have lots of work to do, would hunger, cure for cancer/s, Aids, unity among humans ? Environment, disaster/s hello Florida!... you must not be from the blue stone I live on…

 

[plum]

I suppose I was referring more to the peak of humanity, if it can be called that. Just like in any rich industrialized city there will always be squalor, violence, and dire poverty, these will always accompany our civilization on the fringes no matter how far we progress. I'm young and upwardly mobile and I have no mental or physical problems with myself or even society at large, since I know those problems are a function of perception, and so will never really go away. That plus the fact that I didn't create them. I refuse to devote my life to solving other people's problems. Part of my intellectual maturation has been resolving my existentialist crisis; or finding a good cause to live for (or even die for). I don't see why we have to devote so much effort to merely keeping our boat afloat and maintaining and protecting our lifestyles, when to have true spiritual meaning we ought to be moving ahead. That is, I believe life ought to be a means; a bridge to greater things, not an end in itself. In a philosophical sense, human progress, to me, is what justifies human life.

 

[Unleaded]

I suppose I was referring more to the peak of humanity, if it can be called that. Just like in any rich industrialized city there will always be squalor, violence, and dire poverty, these will always accompany our civilization on the fringes no matter how far we progress. I'm young and upwardly mobile and I have no mental or physical problems with myself or even society at large, since I know those problems are a function of perception, and so will never really go away. That plus the fact that I didn't create them. I refuse to devote my life to solving other people's problems. Part of my intellectual maturation has been resolving my existentialist crisis; or finding a good cause to live for (or even die for). I don't see why we have to devote so much effort to merely keeping our boat afloat and maintaining and protecting our lifestyles, when to have true spiritual meaning we ought to be moving ahead. That is, I believe life ought to be a means; a bridge to greater things, not an end in itself. In a philosophical sense, human progress, to me, is what justifies human life.

So basically you're saying that, because your middle-upper class and you don't see the problems of society (ie it doesn't kick you in the face everyday), you don't have to deal with (its not YOUR problem right?),correct?

I think you're wrong tho. If you aren't a part of solving the problem (well maybe not you, but your class of people<-they have all the resources after all) Then eventually "human progress" will grind to a halt (probably end up going 'backwards' too). If you ignore the problems of your world, eventually they will rise up and bite you in the ass.

Your mentality, of looking ONLY at your own piece of reality, is one of the major problems of today's society. No one gives a **** about anyone else, and that's going to go no where in the long run.

 

[NoTime]

look at how many deaths occur because of hurricanes or such disasterous factors as those.

Not to mention the deaths caused by death.
Still running at 100%

 

[jammieg]

Lol NoTime...philosophy is like masturbation...the longer you hold out to consider before judgment, the better it feels.

 

[3mpathy]

that is a very ...interseting way to look at it lol.

praetor fenix:
"Dont be so quick to think we'e won pal. Nature STILL whops our collective asses."

i agree completely.

 

[BoulderHead]

Philosophy is like masturbation

But just different enough to make each a pleasure.

 

[physicskid]

Well, the increasingly demanding society is always needing people who got the brains to solve problems and be inventive.

Besides, look at the mess we have create for ourselves: Mass deforestation, depletion of ozone layer, global warming, air pollution, presence of nuclear waste, countries absorbing our goddamn taxes to pay for their war and etc. Natural selection and mutation shall 'create' those who can survive this mess to become the next generation of human race.

 

[0TheSwerve0]

OK, I couldn't resist posting after I saw that title. In my Greek language class, we analyzed Plato's Meno and came to a similar conclusion. Meno, for those who haven't read it, is a dialogue in which a cocky nd beautiful youth (Meno) challenges Socrates to answer whether or not virtue is a teachable thing. They go on, knocking out dead ends, and in the process, the Greek suggests that Meno asks Socrates to mentally masturbate him (by explaining virtue and whether or not it is teachable) and implies that he will physically masturbate Socrates in exchange! Not as crude and blunt as Aristophanes, but funnier still since it was unexpected. I don't have the Greek text, but it's at the part where Socrates asks Meno what name we give to a figure. Hope somebody out there enjoyed this post.

It isn't translated so literally in english, but here's the text I found:

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/meno.html, a quarter of the way through.