How do we foster understanding?: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Ethics » How do we foster understanding? » How do we foster understanding?

How do we foster understanding?

loveofsophia
Endeavor to Understand

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 02, 2006
Location: Near Madison in Wisconsin

Total Topics: 46
Total Posts: 728

Posted 06/02/09 - 08:00 AM: Subject: How do we foster understanding?	#1
At present I am aware that much needs to be done (action is needed). A problem I have with ethical theory is it seems often more interested in explaining how things work (which is useful in some respects) than informing actions we presently face (as if ideas accomplish things independent of the actions they inform). It seems to float off into space and have little tread on this here earth where we live/act/react/feel/etc. Here is a question you may want to approuch from whatever ethic you espouse is right: how do we foster understanding and compassion to enable humanity's avoidence of the inevitable catastroph occuring when base instinct (emphasizing base and not instinct) directs powerful world shaping (potentially/likely to be destructive) intellectual/technological abilities? The question is simple (if only). What are the keys to fostering understanding and compassion for others and life so that our presense in the world has a greater potential for being more long-term than it is at present? How does your ethics inform your actions, your life right now? This is a question asking, what are you doing about this? What would you like to do? Is there anything for you to do? There is a certain powerlessness to understanding. I may understand a meteor is coming at the earth and it is a world-killer. The world will do as it will, but the question is, what do we do given we are free (lets leave the freewill/determinism discussion out of this because it is irrelevant, in large part). I understand the enormity of the question. I believe that caring for the people I am around is important. Paying attention, being mindful of my habits, and shaping them to make better use of my time is essential. I believe awareness of the present fosters learning and action of a positive kind. I am into a type of buddhism, taoism, modernized. So, I am of the opinion that the practice of calming and meditation (stillness and limiting our forgetfullness) throughout ones day should be a universal practice. I am certain this may not sit comfortably or familiarly with everyone, but moving on. How does one bring joy and happiness to the world if joy and happiness is not in them? How about eating, does it matter? How about our resource use, does it matter? How about voting and politics, should we be aware and involved? Should particular skills and talents dictate our direction or preoccupation with any of these? All this ethics talk makes me wonder: Are there particular principles, vitues, we may describe as useful for most everyone? Largely, this is a question that aims at the powerlessness of understanding the world and people. Understanding of how and what others/ things are and do is useful in some respects, but I am fully aware of the limitation inherent in being little ol me (don't misunderstand me). I believe we must look to our own lives as the only sphere that can foster understanding and compassion in the world. How is this done? I believe my interest in this has brought my full attention to my individual sphere of control (my body/mind/actions, to whatever extent I have control over these things). Would we all agree understanding and compassion are integral parts of a sound practice in living well? I believe my question really ends in our pointing at ourselves as the only thing we are responsible for. We control only ourselves, so firstly understanding and compassion being developed in ourselves, our sense of our own responsibility for these things, would be necessary for us to have a postive affect in the world. I started this post believing it may be simple to lay out. Now I have overwhelmed it with questions and my aim toward simplicity has seemed to spawn the mother of all ethical questions. Please just take a shot at it if some aspect of the questions catch your fancy. My question could be summed up this way (I believe this is a well known question): Since your death is certain, the time of your death uncertain, what will you do? Edited by loveofsophia on 06/03/09 - 06:42 AM
It is amazing how susceptible to lies we are when young. I believe people are still far more susceptible to lies as adults than they would like. Balancing what could be, our imaginings, with what we know, this is a delicate act of mind.

ciceronianus
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 20, 2008
Location: USA

Total Topics: 11
Total Posts: 1021

Last Blog: Trials in which "Failure is not an option"

Posted 06/02/09 - 08:37 AM:	#2
God's golden teeth! I object--vague, overbroad and unduly burdensome. Seriously, I am a kind of stoic. There are things in our control, and there are things outside of our control. If we concern ourselves overmuch with things outside of our control, we will never be free, and never have tranquility. So, we should do what we can with what is in our control. We can be fair, we can be calm, we can help some, we can leave some alone, we can think, we can conduct ourselves intelligently in a fashion which will not cause harm to others.
"Let us not pretend to doubt in philosophy what we do not doubt in our hearts."--C.S. Peirce "There is nothing so absurd but some philosopher has said it."--Marcus Tullius Cicero "Philosophy recovers itself when it ceases to be a device for dealing with the problems of philosophers and becomes a method, cultivated by philosophers, for dealing with the problems of men."--John Dewey

Makarismos
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 06, 2007
Location: Uk, Midlands

Total Topics: 18
Total Posts: 1206

Posted 06/02/09 - 02:55 PM:	#3
loveofsophia wrote: At present I am aware that much needs to be done (action is needed). A problem I have with ethical theory is it seems often more interested in explaining how things work (which is useful in some respects) than informing actions we presently face (as if ideas accomplish things independent of the actions they inform). It seems to float off into space and have little tread on this here earth where we live/act/react/feel/etc. this is the paradox of ethics, one which most people (i.e. non philosophers) end by simply shrugging off the problem, and getting on with living according to either tradition, how they feel, or both. loveofsophia wrote: how do we foster understanding and compassion to enable humanity's avoidence of the inevitable catastroph occuring when base instinct (emphasizing base and not instinct) directs powerful world shaping (potentially/likely to be destructive) intellectual/technological abilities? Understanding and compassion can only be achieved through empathy, and often this is gained through suffering. The idea of "base" is one which is only found through the examination of actions and the gut reflex to these. Their is a fine line, as the very reactions we count as blessed, are also "basic" and seperated from the base largely by our feelings about them. loveofsophia wrote: The question is simple (if only). What are the keys to fostering understanding and compassion for others and life so that our presense in the world has a greater potential for being more long-term than it is at present? How does your ethics inform your actions, your life right now? I went through a phase of reading utopic fantasy. Utopia, Leviathan, The Republic, all give sweeping statments, gross simplifications, and external, structural solutions to this kind of problem. As I have matured philosophically, I have come to realise that any solution must come from the bottom up, and not the top down. People must want to live in such a state for them to care enough to make it real. loveofsophia wrote: This is a question asking, what are you doing about this? What would you like to do? Is there anything for you to do? There is a certain powerlessness to understanding. I may understand a meteor is coming at the earth and it is a world-killer. The world will do as it will, but the question is, what do we do given we are free (lets leave the freewill/determinism discussion out of this because it is irrelevant, in large part). I agree on the irelivance of that line of thought for the purpose of this discussion. Let us simply say that separateness is illusionary, and no woman is an island . We may do what we can for ourselves, for this moment, but ultimately we have no control at all, as that too is an illusion. Their are problem with the world helping itself: the tragedy of the commons, for example. We will all think it wise to have one more (metaphorical) cow than we should, because we know that our one cow will do no harm. If everyone has one cow extra (by our own reasoning) then we will all die of starvation. On easter island they must have been aware that the last tree was being cut down, and yet it was cut down. loveofsophia wrote: I believe that caring for the people I am around is important. Paying attention, being mindful of my habits, and shaping them to make better use of my time is essential. I believe awareness of the present fosters learning and action of a positive kind. I am into a type of buddhism, taoism, modernized. So, I am of the opinion that the practice of calming and meditation (stillness and limiting our forgetfullness) throughout ones day should be a universal practice. I am certain this may not sit comfortably or familiarly with everyone, but moving on. I have a feeling your on to the right kind of thing. If everyone else was on to this, and had the strength of will to practice it properly (as those who have tried will appreciate!), then the world might indeed be some kind of utopia. I will try to get back to the rest of this later, as I find all of your points (as usual) both interesting, and resonant. But I really must get some sleep. Cheers. M

Wolfman
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Mar 05, 2007
Location: Oakland, CA

Total Topics: 15
Total Posts: 1138

Posted 06/03/09 - 06:36 AM:	#4
loveofsophia wrote: I believe awareness of the present fosters learning and action of a positive kind. Yes, when we realize that our relationships are a part of our nature, and our fates are inevitably and inescapably tied, to a greater or lesser extent for a given individual, we understand that it would be dangerous to forget our future. Empathy and sympathy arise not only from nature and immediate upbringing, but with learning and self-awareness [naturally in relation to others]. Two virtues we can make reference to here are compassion and prudence. I mentioned sympathy, which is a quality and feeling in itself. It is the emotional participation in the feelings of others. This could be experiencing pleasure with another person, or even when experiencing the delight or guilt of a torturer. Sympathy is incomplete because it only has as much value as feeling, and can not change the value of feeling. Compassion, on the other hand, is more precise, being the sympathy of pain, sadness, or suffering in others. Sharing in suffering does not necessarily mean sharing the good or bad reasons for the suffering, rather it means refusing to regard suffering as a matter of indifference. It is the opposite of cruelty, i.e., being indifferent to suffering and rejoicing in it. Good will or intention, however, is incomplete without phronesis or prudence. Living prudently is servicing good will with good sense. It is both suffering and enjoying intelligently. This is a rushed and inadequate response. I will try and revisit your very relevant questions when I get back from my trip.
"That which is done out of love is always beyond good and evil" - Nietzsche "Every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim." - Aristotle "It is better to do one's own duty, however defective it may be, than to follow the duty of another, however well one may perform it. He who does his duty as his own nature reveals it, never sins." - Lao Tzu "Experience without theory is blind, but theory without experience is mere intellectual play." - Kant

180 Proof
kynic

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 27, 2003
Location: NOTHINGlifeNOTHING

Total Topics: 84
Total Posts: 5126

Posted 06/03/09 - 01:11 PM:	#5
"Fostering understanding", it seems to me, is the intellectual challenge of cooperatively finding common ground (e.g. sharable interests) as (the) criterion, or final arbiter, for (provisionally) settling any given, critical disagreement, or conflict. Isn't this the modus vivendi of culture? loveofsophia wrote: Here is a question you may want to approuch from whatever ethic you espouse is right: how do we foster understanding and compassion to enable humanity's avoidence of the inevitable catastroph occuring when base instinct (emphasizing base and not instinct) directs powerful world shaping (potentially/likely to be destructive) intellectual/technological abilities? What warrants the assumption that "inevitable catastrophes" are avoidable? Especially if what makes them both "inevitable" and "catastrophes" is that they are self-created -- self-inflicted -- intractable problems (e.g. civil (or proxy) wars, environmental disasters, societal collapses, political-economic crises, cultural extinctions, etc)? If, as history strongly suggests (re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colla..._Choose_to_Fail_or_Succeed ), "understanding and compassion" more often than not fail "to enable humanity's avoidance of inevitable catastrophes" (e.g. Maoist Anschluss of Tibet (1950-present); Euro-ethnic genocide of indigenous peoples of Americas (1492 onwards) & Australia (1780s onward); Mayan collapse 9th century CE; etc), then these aspirations, while preferable, are not in themselves efficacious in the long run. If one assumes otherwise then, I think, a more apt question might be: *how do we prepare* ourselves to survive (& cope with) "inevitable catastrophes" of our own -- personal, political-economic & cultural -- making?** My most recent attempt to formulate a succinct (hint of an) "answer" to this question is here: http://forums.philosophyforums.com...findpost=567621#post567621 My question's guiding assumption (from historical & anthropological observations) is that what makes (our) "catastrophes" "inevitable" is that they are, in the main, predominately self-created. *We can't escape ourselves so (somehow) we must learn to formulate & execute strategies* for overcoming / prevailing against ourselves** -- both as individuals-among-individuals-within-groups & groups-among-groups-sharing commons. My question could be summed up this way (I believe this is a well known question): Since your death is certain, the time of your death uncertain, what will you do? Vita simplex et contemplativa. Deus, sive Natura (re: "scientia intuitiva"). Amor fati (re: "eternal recurrence of the same"). Carpe diem ... (In other words, I'm cultivating these habits: never deny The Absurd; always sing The Blues; try to Help others to Help themselves whenever possible; & prevent preventable Harm.) Edited by 180 Proof on 06/03/09 - 01:16 PM. Reason: ...
The question isn't "Which explanations do I believe?" but rather "Which explanations do I least disbelieve?" Absence of evidence THAT MUST BE THERE (i.e. implied by any claim, concept, or (its) predicates, that affects changes in/to the world) entails evidence of absence. [What cannot be done?[What cannot be hoped?[What cannot be known?]]]

Legion
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 25, 2008
Location: North Carolina

Total Topics: 7
Total Posts: 117

Posted 06/03/09 - 06:46 PM:	#6
"We must become the change we want to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi
We sense. We reason. We predict. We don't always get those right.

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.