StarDestroyer.Net BBS

You know how some characters in movies, series, whatever, seem to talk about philosophy, or talk philosophically so much when they're having conversations?


Do you think this is being immature on their part?

A pretense at being intellectual, and a horribly out of date exercise; it would be akin to pseudointellerctuals in the 19th century still seriously debating how many angels dance on the head of a pin.

Actually, it was on the point of a needle, and more of a joke in it's time regarding trivial philosophy matters.

The kind of philosophy that characters in movies discuss is invariably just as trivial as a discussion of angels dancing on the head of a pin. The only philosophy that's worthwhile is the study of logic and ethics. The rest of it is an archaic exercise in navel-gazing reminiscence about the good old days when aristocratic men sat around in oak-panelled smoking rooms and discussed the nature of reality and self because they didn't have anything better to do. Science has supplanted their raison d'etre.

Reminds me precisely of the girl I debated twice and asked her about the results. Absurd pretensious pseudointellectualism. Much to my lack of suprise, I learned today she prides herself on taking Humanities AP Exams, a great many of them, but no AP Calc, AP Bio, AP Chem, AP Physics, etc.

Case by case basis, I suppose.

Durran Korr wrote:Case by case basis, I suppose.

I would agree.

Subject, meaning, significance, execution, etc... should be considered.

But if you do mean like stuff in the Matrix films, then it's just purposeless babble to fill out the script and make the characters and their quests sound more importent and "profound."

I agree with Mike. Any philosophy beyond reason and ethics is pointless. It is arbitrary and thus not useful to man, quite the opposite infact.

kojikun wrote:I agree with Mike. Any philosophy beyond reason and ethics is pointless. It is arbitrary and thus not useful to man, quite the opposite infact.

Ah yes, I can see how considering things you'd not normally consider could be a burden.

I did not say that, Dalton, I merely said that things that are not reasonable in nature are not useful philosophies. And ethics is, ofcourse, how we act in the world according to our episotemology (reason) and metaphysics (that things make sense). Flights of fancy involving faith are useless in our interaction with the world. This is no more than what Mike said.

Like nearly all things philosphy is quite dandy, and sometimes productive, in moderation. In extremes, it invariably gets lost.

One can get quite drunk on possibilities, and make rather a fool of one's self.

Generally speaking, when you hear questions like "what is reality?" or "what is truth?" coming from someone's mouth, you'd best prepare for a whole lot of useless bullshit.

With the exception of the Matrix franchise, there really isnt too many films where people endulge in blatant and excessive philosophy speeches.

Darth Wong wrote:Generally speaking, when you hear questions like "what is reality?" or "what is truth?" coming from someone's mouth, you'd best prepare for a whole lot of useless bullshit.

When somebody asks "what is reality" and "what is truth", ask him to put his hand flat on the table —then hit it with a hammer. When you ask him if it hurt and he invariably says "yes", tell him his questions are answered.

I've always wondered what the meaning of life is. But it should be different for each person, so that's an individual question.

StormTrooperTR889 wrote:I've always wondered what the meaning of life is. But it should be different for each person, so that's an individual question.

Nope, there is one answer.

42.

Y'know, even though I'm the head of a college chapter of the national philosophy honorary fraternity, I basically agree with everything that's been said. My only change would be to add aesthetics to the list of "useful" philosophies, to go along with logic and ethics. Being able to understand portions of another person's culture is very useful for diplomacy and negotiations. Metaphysics, OTOH, is a waste of time since there's no real purpose to it. Does it really matter whether everything is matter or everything is thought, as long as we all exist in a reality that can be understood (partially) by all of us?

Dark: Aesthetics is an interesting branch of philosophy. I have maintained that aesthetics, as the study of beauty, means to study art. The purpose of art, ofcourse, is for the enjoyment of the artist and those who view these pieces. What is enjoyable is subjective, ofcourse, and so I would say that aesthetics cannot be studied or have rules. Beyond somethings function as art, however, you can have rules.