Yahoo Answers is shutting down on 4 May 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Can philosophy respect be earned by having an open, mistake ridden history ?
Unlike the philosophy for example of Yuval Noah Harari ?
1) That we don't have freewill, (we do).
2) That if we learn HOW to deal with failure we can learn-from-our mistakes.
2) We here especially more from our Answers than from our Questions asked,
we may believe.
That is we can learn more about our failures and mistakes, revising these
over time to ask more pertinent Questions. And some religious philosophers
commentators have taken this-to-the-extreme in that they have answered many
more questions than they have asked... to the point where some have asked
Zero Questions. They are "answer rich" so to speak, and continue to
answer questions without adding-to-their meagre total of unknown (Question)
knowledge.
We may say of such religious philosophers that like Harari they have learned
HOW to deal with failure as they have learned-from-their mistakes.
And Harari may have more Questions to ask (especially so if he were here
on Yahoo Answers) but DO THOSE religious philosophers above WHO
HAVE answered many more questions here than they have asked questions?
I have previously said that "no" because they may Have learned HOW to
deal with their failures but that they HAVE NOT LEARNED FROM THEIR
Mistakes.
Like I propose Yuval Noah Harari has not learned-from-his-mistake
concerning freewill ; and the resultant Almost self-perpetuating
mistake of the belief that Artificial Intelligence can "know more than humans
know about themselves" and so replace freewill with A.I. control.
...and if the above is correct then it should be suggested that THOSE Subjective
philosophers together with new subjective commentators TO Yahoo Answers
both CAN "start afresh" so-to-speak in that they can quite easily start-to-ask
Questions WHERE THEY Previously didn't.
In this way -perhaps even ahead of Yuval Noah Harari- in this way they can
start to ask questions that may have wanted to ask here before ; to ask
questions that they thought that they were not qualified to rationally ask ;
to ask questions here that they thought they were not qualified to critically ask.
To ask more crucial questions of an open environment in which THEY HAVE
NOT FAILED IN, and of which is sufficiently large to accommodate them.
(just seen my mistakes above, should read.... we here especially LEARN more
from our Answers than from our Questions asked... Above, second 2) first line)
my apology.
waiting.....
2 Answers
- ?Lv 511 months ago
I am as I am.
I am a reasoner and I am a feeler. Sometimes beyond tolerance. I am not here to be this or that, one side or another. I am here to make sure that principles are upheld. I venture into ethics, politics and social justice to challenge people to explain their positions and help modify my own sentiments. This is a messy and objectionable activity which is best kept between me and my argumenters.
I challenge people. There needs to be an opponent in order to keep things real. Don’t accept the position of a sheep. Stand on principles and provide a counterpoint. Sometimes I have been successful in getting people to explain themselves but if the subject is sensitive enough it won’t happen. You have to break social etiquette while being decent and principled to create a circumstance that gets all the players thinking and explaining.
Sometimes I like a good fight but a friendly one. There is no point if it is only negative and no substance. It is stressful going up against people. You have to view them in a certain way, like animals that lash out, and that you have to be prepared, and that you are the tamer. And there may not be a point. If it is impossible to communicate points in an uphill battle.
I have learned that you can avoid most of the fury of people by controlling the storm within you, the flames of fury inside yourself, and not facilitating it in others. When others bring a storm, do not get swept away in it. Do not react to it. Let the evil pass.
There are more peaceful ways to live. I approach these things differently today than in the past. Even though there were good things in my strident ways, it does not always work with people, and I now try to understand the limitations of people that more constructive interactions take place.
There were mistakes made but I do not think they will be seen or understood the way I see and understand. They may not even be acknowledged. I do not want to be in constant battle mode. I want to control the storm. Limit it.
I am not an animal. But there are animals out there. Waiting for those that venture away from the flock. You have to become a tamer. Sheep are also animals though. Unthinking and reactive.
Philosophy is peaceful by comparison. I cannot get in trouble. Not many people place lines here that I should not cross, and there is not so much hegemony or groupthink.
There were mistakes and I try not to repeat them, and not make such a mess. But I was young and just learning the ropes of people. I did so by creating sandbox simulations and situations with real people, and that I can take real world data to learn from. Facts instead of fears.
People choose to be open or closed for reasons of their own. It can be complex and based on experience. Sometimes fears but sometimes facts of human behaviour.
Know human behaviour and challenge humans to be more rational creatures. Tame the snake before it bites. Become better at defending and advancing.
