Philospher vs Prophet: Wisdom

[Michael]

The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.
ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα hen oída hoti oudén oída (Greek)
scio me nihil scire or scio me nescire (Latin)
-- Socrates (469 399 BCE)

To know is to know that you know nothing.
--Confucius (551 – 479 BCE)

“The more I read, the more I meditate; and the more I acquire, the more I am enabled to affirm that I know nothing”
-- Voltaire (1694-1778)

“The only thing that we know is that we know nothing and that is the highest flight of human wisdom.”
-- Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy (1828–1910)

"Those who know, do not say
Those who say, do not know."
-- Lao-tzu (400BCE-ish)



Do you agree?



What are all of these Philosophers trying to say?



Contrast this philosophical way of thinking with that of a Prophet. Prophets Appeal to Authority - that is GOD. When they pronounce a new "revelation" (which is supposed knowledge for the little guy) they do exactly the OPPOSITE of what all of these wise people have stressed. Because by saying their ideas come from GOD there is an inherent notion that this is TRUE knowledge. For a Prophet to say as much they have somehow come to the conclusion they KNOW something. They're going to wrap this knowledge in a cocoon of GOD said such and such and pass it off as unquestionable truth. This suggests to me that they have not acquired a basic tenant of wisdom - admitting we don't really know anything for sure.

Well, that says something about their character if you ask me.

I, following a couple jugs of beer tonight, started thinking, this might be one of the reasons why some of these philosophers went down this line of thought and came to this epiphany? I mean, what they were thinking about. Why they were thinking about something, the motivation, is sometimes as interesting as the epiphany they had - and may help bring it into focus.

We always see the math equation but rarely what lead to it.

 

[Rav]

I do not agree that we know nothing. We know plenty of things about ourselves and the world we live in. It is only when we consider the age old fundamental questions surrounding existence itself that we come face to face with the fact that we are clueless. But this does not invalidate all of the other knowledge and wisdom that we can and do possess.

 

[Bishadi]

I do not agree that we know nothing. We know plenty of things about ourselves and the world we live in. It is only when we consider the age old fundamental questions surrounding existence itself that we come face to face with the fact that we are clueless. But this does not invalidate all of the other knowledge and wisdom that we can and do possess.

that be fair and something i could agree with, in response to the OP

knowledge evolves (follow the pattern)

that tells us all, that ONE day, the truth can EXIST (will/does)

we have the internet, and them OT's (old timers) did not.

that STYLE of humility is easily found in the eastern philosophies (to ease the suffering of "not knowing" it is often best to just face it; "we just don't know")

but never give up on seeking......... 'the rest of the story'

teaching any, that 'we will not'................ is beyond stupid!

 

[wynn]

Does anyone know anyone who actually lives as if they knew nothing?

 

[lightgigantic]

Given that there are clear examples from the philosophers quoted that they argued against many somethings, not them for a start ....

 

[Doreen]

The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.
ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα hen oída hoti oudén oída (Greek)
scio me nihil scire or scio me nescire (Latin)
-- Socrates (469 399 BCE)

To know is to know that you know nothing.
--Confucius (551 – 479 BCE)

“The more I read, the more I meditate; and the more I acquire, the more I am enabled to affirm that I know nothing”
-- Voltaire (1694-1778)

“The only thing that we know is that we know nothing and that is the highest flight of human wisdom.”
-- Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy (1828–1910)

"Those who know, do not say
Those who say, do not know."
-- Lao-tzu (400BCE-ish)



Do you agree?

I mean Michael, dearie.
You start off with a list of famous people, two of them arguably the beginners of religions,
and use their authority to support your idea.
Anyone who reads Socrates, at the least Plato's version, would be hard pressed to accept his assertion he thought he knew nothing. My goodness he spent a lot of time telling people they were wrong and how society should be organized. Confucious also was rather specific about the way things should be for someone non-hypocritically claiming he knew nothing.

As far as I can tell everyone claims to have true knowledge, at the very least about how to gain knowledge - and frankly they generally slip up, even in a very controlled communication environment like the internet, and reveal beliefs not founded on their holy epistemology, whatever it is.
Telling people that you know nothing is asserting quite a bit. Intimating that they should have this same attitude....well, it can't really work. How would one know they should if one knows nothing.

Even the comparison between prophets and philosophers is a claim to knowledge.

 

[Michael]

I mean Michael, dearie.
You start off with a list of famous people, two of them arguably the beginners of religions,
and use their authority to support your idea.
Anyone who reads Socrates, at the least Plato's version, would be hard pressed to accept his assertion he thought he knew nothing. My goodness he spent a lot of time telling people they were wrong and how society should be organized. Confucious also was rather specific about the way things should be for someone non-hypocritically claiming he knew nothing.

As far as I can tell everyone claims to have true knowledge, at the very least about how to gain knowledge - and frankly they generally slip up, even in a very controlled communication environment like the internet, and reveal beliefs not founded on their holy epistemology, whatever it is.
Telling people that you know nothing is asserting quite a bit. Intimating that they should have this same attitude....well, it can't really work. How would one know they should if one knows nothing.

Even the comparison between prophets and philosophers is a claim to knowledge.

haha... good points

It certainly may be that these guys (and me as well) are all full of crap ...hahaha... I did mention I had been drinking all afternoon at a pub?

But there is something there, I hope. At the very least I think it's a different approach to telling people stuff. (1) I'm a dude that like to think about things, these are my thoughts, I may be full of shit, you decide. (2) God told me this, therefor this.

We know there are no Gods. So why take the second route? Why do it? If you think what you have to say is worth listening to, just say it.

Suppose I think there are no Gods. I see one group of Godbots killing another group over what, IMO, seem to be trivial difference in superstition. I can either (1) make my case on why they shouldn't believe in Gods or (2) tell everyone Xenu told me there are no Gods and therefor it's true :bugeye:

Isn't it better to go for route (1)?


I wonder why all of these people from various cultures have arrived at similar points? I don't think they are really saying they KNOW nothing - but that its possible they are wrong. Can't really do that with Gods. Gods are after all Gods.

If I may be wrong - you should think about what I just told you.
If I can not be wrong - you should not think about what I just told you and simply accept it as fact.

 

[mike47]

People know lots of things and not zero thing regardless to what our friend Socrates said.......

 

[Doreen]

haha... good points

Thanks.

But there is something there, I hope. At the very least I think it's a different approach to telling people stuff. (1) I'm a dude that like to think about things, these are my thoughts, I may be full of shit, you decide. (2) God told me this, therefor this.

These are not mutually exclusive positions.

We know there are no Gods.

I'm not sure who 'we' are.

So why take the second route? Why do it? If you think what you have to say is worth listening to, just say it.

It sounds like you think everyone who believes in God doesn't really. Or that if they do they arrived at this position by a kind of mental choice based on nothing. I don't think this is the case.

Suppose I think there are no Gods. I see one group of Godbots killing another group over what, IMO, seem to be trivial difference in superstition. I can either (1) make my case or (2) tell everyone Xenu told me there are no Gods and therefor it's true :bugeye:

Must be some third options. I mean what do you tell a serial killer who says we are simply complicated chemical machines and in 100 years all these machines will be broken anyway?

 

[Michael]

Thanks.

No worries

I'm not sure who 'we' are.

It that sort of we, that we like to use informally as we did when we were kids and our group realized that Santa was a story and it was really our parents that left those gifts. While we couldn't "prove" those other kids' pressies weren't from Santa - we spoke as if we did ...

It sounds like you think everyone who believes in God doesn't really. Or that if they do they arrived at this position by a kind of mental choice based on nothing. I don't think this is the case.

My mistake. No, I do think a lot of people believe they know what God would like. This is a general feeling IMO. When people say they can hear a voice in their head - well, that's different. It's why priests will say they can "feel" the Holy Ghost. If they say: God specifically told me these words - well, now people start calling bullshit.

Must be some third options. I mean what do you tell a serial killer who says we are simply complicated chemical machines and in 100 years all these machines will be broken anyway?

hmmm not following the analygy. And I've just sat through 8 episodes of the GITS-SAC so I should


Let me ask you this. What is the difference between Philosophers and Prophets? Both seem to want to tell us something and I like to think this information is coming from a human source. So? What do you think? Is there a difference in:
You shouldn't kill other humans because of reasons X,Y and Z.
God said you shouldn't kill other humans because it's a sin.

:shrug:

 

[S.A.M.]

So, ignorance is a point of view?

 

[Michael]

So, ignorance is a point of view?

coming from you SAM... hahaha....

 

[S.A.M.]

Actually, you're the one making the claim.

Or have you changed your mind about the thread?

Imagine every single person you know thinking like this: I don't know vs the one man who says I believe

 

[wynn]

Suppose I think there are no Gods. I see one group of Godbots killing another group over what, IMO, seem to be trivial difference in superstition. I can either (1) make my case on why they shouldn't believe in Gods or (2) tell everyone Xenu told me there are no Gods and therefor it's true :bugeye:

Isn't it better to go for route (1)?

See, this is all about your role in society, the part you play in the discourse about religion.

It's not about religion, or gods, or Xenu.

It's about you maintaining your position, and you expecting others to respect it, while you reserve yourself the right not to respect their position(s).

 

[Michael]

Actually, you're the one making the claim.

Or have you changed your mind about the thread?

Imagine every single person you know thinking like this: I don't know vs the one man who says I believe

Is the idea really just "I don't know"?

 

[Michael]

See, this is all about your role in society, the part you play in the discourse about religion.

It's not about religion, or gods, or Xenu.

It's about you maintaining your position, and you expecting others to respect it, while you reserve yourself the right not to respect their position(s).

I don't expect anyone here to change their position on theistic belief no more than I expect them change their language. As a matter of fact, in all the time I have been on these boards the only person who MAY have changed their belief was SouthStar years ago. And if I remember correctly that person was rather young, in Uni and pretty well thought out.


I imagine it would be rather difficult to defend Xenu or Santa or Gods. BUT, that's not really the point.

Did you know there are some Scientologists that beleive Xenu is really spelled Xemu. From here:

apparently the only time the so called Last Prophet Ron Hubbard wrote the word down. If in the future Scientology continues to grow in membership (which in fact it surely will) and the Xenu people started killed the Xemu people - well, as a member of society what role do you think you play? Any?


Lastly, how do you compare Philosophers and Prophets?

 

[Bishadi]

So, ignorance is a point of view?

what do you think a physicist is?

 

[swarm]

To know nothing you must be nothing, but to be nothing you must give up being who you thought you were.

 

[Bishadi]

To know nothing you must be nothing,

so the premise is off to start with

ie.... the unknown is not forever; knowledge evolves

but to be nothing you must give up being who you thought you were.

be humble, to learn

never give up being a one, just learn to be a one within the whole

i am something and so are you

to discount that, creates a nothing affecting everyone

 

[wynn]

I don't expect anyone here to change their position on theistic belief no more than I expect them change their language.

*tsk tsk