--- Log opened Thu Sep 13 00:00:16 2018
02:13 < whilo> hmm. this sounds like you are living through part of the history of philosophy. in effect trying to find ground through some transcendental reasoning a la kant who also moved toward the reason of the individual citizen
02:15 < whilo> i think some empirical approach could help you balance your thoughts. it is somewhat logical that if you think about it long enough the problem will appear in you (the individual)
02:15 < whilo> i am not sure i understand what you saying though
02:17 < whilo> "god alone knows what more could be done" -> god is a very contradictory concept that was invented to make things unbroken an impartial
02:18 < whilo> i am with you in thinking that people do not know what they want and are full of contradictions. but i think this is not separable from the institutions of society
02:19 < whilo> and if you raise the bar that high you can make almost arbitrary statements about whom to blame and faults of individuals
02:19 < whilo> it helps to look at concrete social developments like the increasing gap between rich and poor
02:19 < whilo> you can frame an ethic to condemn this, but it will not be absolutely justified. it will require doing a deliberate commitment
03:17 < mcallan> it may just be that i haven't referred to the theory, so it is obscure to you
03:18 < mcallan> not that disclosing it would help much (too much effort for both of us)
03:19 < mcallan> but the empirical is there (one pillar) and reason too (another),
03:21 < mcallan> and no transcendantal assumptions that i'm aware of
03:23 < mcallan> but it is an engineer's theory, pragmatic through and through and focused on practical achievement
03:24 < mcallan> *my* achievement, as no other (being pragmatic) is under my control
03:25 < mcallan> hence the subjective stance, first and foremost, is what enables me to grapple with things
03:28 < mcallan> the transcendental i left to god, but without assuming god;
03:29 < mcallan> they belong to each other, and i have no access to either
03:31 < mcallan> if i follow your advice and assume the fault (line of breakage, or its cause)
03:32 < mcallan> is out there in society for real, as opposed to just a way of looking at it,
03:32 < mcallan> then i make a transcendantal assumption
03:34 < mcallan> i need no such assumption, however,
03:35 < mcallan> because i have undeniable evidence of a fault line within me,
03:41 < mcallan> empirical evidence from physical nature (out there it seems),
03:43 < mcallan> that reason within me is at risk
03:57 < mcallan> i value reason above all
04:00 < mcallan> when i am incompetent, when my care, attentiveness, effort or skill do not not suffice,
04:00 < mcallan> then the evidence comes pouring in
04:03 < mcallan> signalled first by fear (the empirical alarm bell) which calls me to action
04:13 < mcallan> it calls *me* to action
04:13 < mcallan> if my response is to point the finger not at myself, but at something out there,
04:14 < mcallan> then that can only be denial, an attempt to shoot a messenger who cannot be shot,
04:14 < mcallan> because then the evidence pours in all the stronger
04:19 < mcallan> (ach, too many words)
04:24 < mcallan> the upshot is that always - always - i discover that *i* have failed to do something
04:29 < mcallan> so i give you the practical evidence, and with that you have enough of theory,
04:29 < mcallan> because you know that whatever it is, it cannot deny the evidence
04:33 < mcallan> (i just add, bear in mind, i speak of myself only)
--- Log closed Fri Sep 14 00:00:30 2018