1) "For even saintly folk will act like sinners
Unless they have their customary dinners."
-Bertolt Brecht, The Threepenny Opera
From the first of the book I was almost plagued by this statement. Will people act out if thrown into something new/different?
2) When do social ideals and patriotic ties become unimportant, lost or muddled together?
3) Can concrete answers and philosophical theories meet in the middle? Or can realistic theology and ethical idealism meet in the middle?
4) Can we as humans function without some form of politics invading the society we live in?
I'm not familiar with some of the terms you use in your posts. Things like "social ideals" and ethical idealism" are mushy terms to me, so it might help if we had some definitions for people who aren't philosophy-majors.
ReplyDeletei will like to start this by saying GREAT questions.
ReplyDelete1)Social ideals and patriotic ties become unimportant when one realizes that their existences isn’t measured by some practice of formality or pride though patriotism ties into loyalty transitioning into pride. In our origins as a spice we survived as hunters and gatherers our loyalty was to our tribe because it was advantageous to our survival. We had to support our tribes’ men who would hunt and the woman and children who would gather fire wood. Every one played an important role. Today though the same words are spoken, as the beginning, with the intent of having one universal meaning in today’s culture this isn’t true. Language barriers are deeper than dialect or different languages. If two converse in the same tongue about one thing but to both the one thing has a different meaning, then the two are having a different conversation with each other.
3) I want to say no, not because most of the knowledge gather on earth is merely theory based on what’s really going on or because some dead smart guy made something sound really cool, but because of beliefs. As far as religion and philosophy I can say that there is not a middle ground because the principles are so far from each other. Philosophy asks the questions that religion can’t answer. As a material society we want to see what we believe because we believe in the reality of sight. If I see it then it exists, and if I don’t then it doesn’t. For most people it’s that simple and for others it is not. And for that reason is why there is no bridge for philosophy and religion.
4) As far as government goes yes, we as humans can survive without it. We have placed value on materials that hold no significance. If a Zebra where to be a human it would not be able to understand, road rage, college tuition, debt, or because my boyfriend/girlfriend broke up with through text because all that it is worried about is SURVIVING. I compared humans to a Zebra because we are animals. Now as far as social politics no we cannot survive without them. Because, we need to do what is advantageous to our survival. If I’m nice to you and that’s going to get me laid then I’m going to be nice to you. I want my spices to keep thriving therefore I will do whatever it takes to do so.
(Gio)