|
| Author | Topic: being alone |
| Rudolph |
posted 6/30/06 3:02 PM
As always, excuse me for my lack of technical knowledge.~~~~~There is a link between existentialism and metaphysics, right? In the way the theory of relativity relates to quantum physics. Both play their equal part in the universe, both dealing with almost the same issues, but with an entirely different scope. Or like anthropology and sociology. I think you will get the idea.~~~~~Has anyone here read Isaac Asimov’s Foundation trilogy, originally written in the 1940’s? It is speculative fiction, and not be taken seriously. It proposes the old question (and solves it I might add) of men inventing special arithmetic and using it along with psychology toward Universal sociological predictions. So, based on The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire, the story unfolds.My question is: has any serious scholar ever attempted to use George Bool’s symbols for logic in relation to sociological issues? Could one for instance take the daily workings of a detailed, well defined office, and turns it into Boolean symbols to see whether the work is done the most effective way – by incorporating some deduction/induction. Seeing as you’d know what the goal of each task is, who performs it and why (right or wrong), could this be done? And most importantly, has it been done?~~~~~Back to my initial question... My main interests lie in moral philosophy, but I think we are ultimately a lonely creature, even if we are not made for it (judged by our reactions to such a state). But even if that is true, there is still the greater good, which might seem like a paradox, but it just feels right to me. I am more worried about the world as a whole than myself. I think people should concern themselves rather with their own community than their own happiness, or pretending to care for the world work when you only live for yourself. Which brings me to democracy. I’m not sure what Aristotle’s views were, but I believe he was opposed to the latter, on the basis that is tries to cater for too large a world, while neglecting that which is right in front of us. Ultimately I think everyone should be happy, but we should also be happy when we can help others, not just when we do something for ourselves. Can most people get a positive and good feeling from performing such acts, or must moral philosophy be taught in a proper, separate form during the education of the young to instill this sense of duty to the community? I’m not opposed to personal hedonism, but do not think universal hedonism is correct either, neither can a person be expected to only perform acts which have utility. That is no life, we are not machines.~~~~~Thank you. Keep well. |
| Rudolph |
posted 6/30/06 3:06 PM
I'm gogin home now. Sorry I didn't really talk about the link between E. and M. I did mean to be unclear on purpose. Briefly I just wanted to talk about how our questions about why we are here, who we are, what we are, what our role in life should be, why it is... maybe metaphysics could help alleviate some of the burden we carry, if we can relate such basic laws to our understanding of who and what we are. You'd still need some faith in science I suppose because that is what is comes down to. |
| Rudolph |
posted 6/30/06 5:17 PM
I'm going home now. Sorry I didn't really talk about the link between E. and M. I didn’t mean to be unclear on purpose. Briefly I just wanted to talk about how our questions about why we are here, who we are, what we are, what our role in life should be, why it is... maybe metaphysics could help alleviate some of the burden we carry, if we can relate such basic laws (universal laws from the principal science in M.) to our understanding of who and what we are. You'd still need some faith in science I suppose because that is what is comes down to.~~~~~And sorry for using big common technical words all the time. But I will only learn to speak my own mind through practise. |
| 1 |
posted 4/26/08 4:34 PM
Test1[URL=http://www.google.com]Test2 |
|
|