-
October 8th, 2001, 05:22 PM
#1
TastinGood
Guest
Here are just the first few things that popped into my head after reading your messge.
Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.
Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.
A system of thought based on or involving such inquiry: the philosophy of Hume.
The critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs.
The disciplines presented in university curriculums of science and the liberal arts, except medicine, law, and theology.
The discipline comprising logic, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and epistemology.
A set of ideas or beliefs relating to a particular field or activity; an underlying theory: an original philosophy of advertising.
A system of values by which one lives: has an unusual philosophy of life.
------------------
"If Lincoln had thought being the President was such a longshot, we'd have nobody's picture on the one dollar bill" -Arthur Fonzerelli (The Fonz)
-
October 8th, 2001, 06:15 PM
#2
HB Forum Owner
Close this thread...TastinGood has posted the most well thought out and written definitions I have ever seen. TastinGood, you should write a dictionary.
------------------
"He called the shit, poop!" - Billy Madison
-
October 8th, 2001, 08:10 PM
#3
HB Forum Owner
when i first saw that tastingood replied to this post, one of two possible outcomes quickly rose in my head:
1)TastinGood: 'Philosophy for me is
the occasional epiphany i receive from
pumping gas.'
thank you for proving my second thought.
------------------
~~share some greased tea with me~~
General Philosophy
-
October 9th, 2001, 03:28 AM
#4
HB Forum Owner
i suppose i should have done this in the beginning. oh well, sue me.
i want to know your definition of philosophy. i am NOT wanting a text book/dictionary definition.
I WANT YOUR DEFINITION.
i am asking this because i believe it would help everyone (mostly me) understand what is going on here.
take it as this: there is no right and wrong answer. just post what you think...please.
------------------
~~share some greased tea with me~~
General Philosophy
-
October 9th, 2001, 04:42 PM
#5
Senior Hostboard Member
Philosphy - in my own uneducated experiance -isn't so much a thing, as it is a way of being. A person is philosophical when they think outside of the normal exceptance, in order to gain a greater understand of something. Whether it be nature, the body, etc.. just looking at things from a different angle, and questioning what is behind the scenes as well as what's in front, and how the two join. *shrugs*
------------------
As miserable as life may be I hold it pretty precious...
If I lose the light of the sun, I will write by candlelight, moonlight, no light. If I lose paper and ink, I wil write in blood on forgotten walls. I will write always, I will capture nights all over the world and bring them to you.
-
October 9th, 2001, 06:40 PM
#6
HB Forum Moderator
Philosophy is asking why.
Philosophizing is answering why.
------------------
Alex
-
October 9th, 2001, 09:48 PM
#7
HB Forum Owner
why?
------------------
~~share some greased tea with me~~
General Philosophy
-
October 10th, 2001, 12:24 AM
#8
Inactive Member
why not :P
------------------
Sure the universe is a great place, but if it wasn't here, no-one would miss it.
-
October 10th, 2001, 04:27 AM
#9
HB Forum Moderator
why ask why?....urp.
------------------
Alex
-
October 10th, 2001, 07:22 PM
#10
Inactive Member
My deffinition IS the dictionary's Deffinition. If you want a deffinition for some vairiation on the theme of phylosophy, perhapse some branch thereof, perhapse you should consider creating a compound term to fit the intention of your concept of phylosophy. If not you risk never quite having your question answered, and never quite understanding any answers you are given fully....But, I digress.
In closing, one does best to adhear strictly to the dictionary deffinition, for other wise one speaks some vairiant of english, but not english it's self, and misunderstandings arise from this. If you have seen deeper into a thing than Webster for Gd's sake expand the total amont of knowledge in the language, and keep both folly and fact historically intact.
for goodness sake dont try to redefine what you have just established to be false, all that will lead to is some one else falling prey to the same folly later since there is no lingual record of the folly.
------------------
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks