Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Philosophy Club

[JackDaydream]

The reason why I am writing this thread is that I see a gap or gulf between the theoretical aspects of philosophy, ranging from ideas about mind, ideas about ethics and questions about religion, including the idea of God. Sometimes, the reading of theories seem to enhance thinking about these matters critically, whereas at other times the theoretical or academic debates seem so abstract and obscure. I read on such areas, ranging from ideas about mind and body, including dualism, as well as the varying angles of ethics, including those based on duties or consequences. Also, ideas about 'God' are often based on philosophy arguments which may be detached from the basis of experience.

Of course, each person has only their knowledge of subjective experience, as well as that disclosed by others. There are writers who come from the angle of exploration of experience itself, although that is often juggled by arguments based on consensus. Some of the various approaches to philosophy are based on appeal to rational arguments and others on learned experience, or wisdom. I am not wishing to set this up as an ultimate divide, as I appreciate both knowledge gained from historical writers on the basis of rationality alongside the nature of unique experiences. It is likely that even those based on reason are not completely impartial and those written on the ideas have some grounding in real life or existential experience. I am not sure if this area will be a meaningful one to others or not, but I do find that I am trying to find bridges between theory and experience in thinking about consciousness, as well as ideas about the nature of reality and the ethical dilemmas in life, especially in ethics and the area of values. I hope that what I am saying is not too vague, and I am willing to expand in order to find what I see as a meaningful area of debate about the pursuit and purpose of philosophy. How do you see the dialogue between theory and practice in philosophy?

[JackDaydream]

I will just add that the reason why I wrote this thread topic is not to say that philosophy theories are not important. I spend a lot of time reading and thinking about theories, including trying to find new ones, often linked to science. It is partly that I am not sure that people always choose their beliefs on the basis of the arguments within theory. Factors in life experiences, like suffering may play a role, and even choices of pleasure may influence philosophy perspectives. In particular, the experiences in life may influence the way people alter or modify their perspectives. I am aware that reflection on experiences are central to my own philosophy quest. Do you think that you are influenced by what happens in your life too? In other words, iit s all about facts and logic or about a sense of searching for wisdom about how to live?

[LuckyR]

Thanks for making the thread. I too am more interested in the practical application of philosophical ideas than their role in a purely theoretical environment. Specifically, I enjoy the intersection of psychological drivers on the human ability to work within a philosophical framework.

[JackDaydream]

Thanks for making the thread. I too am more interested in the practical application of philosophical ideas than their role in a purely theoretical environment. Specifically, I enjoy the intersection of psychological drivers on the human ability to work within a philosophical framework.

I am glad that someone else appreciates the practical application of philosophy in life. I try not to lose sight of this when I am reading about the various aspects because a deeper, critical approach was the main reason why I looked to philosophy in the first instance. I do read on the topic of critical thinking as well, because it gives tools for analysis which go beyond commonsense ideas.

The interplay between psychology and philosophy is extremely important and, my thread topic may be putting philosophy on the therapy couch, in exploring the link. I am aware of many who study psychology as opposed to philosophy in the search for self knowledge and awareness. This may be because often the idea of the philosopher conjures up a picture of remoteness and distance from life, which seems a shame, when philosophy has the scope for living the 'examined life' as suggested by Socrates and Plato.

In many ways, cognitive behavioral therapy works in this respect but, nevertheless, the full scope of philosophy and its interrelationship with other disciplines may enable the fullest exploration of the examined life, based on the link between theory and practical experiences in daily life. This may have become lost in the last century and there is a need for being able to not get lost in the maze and glamour of theoretical expertise, but bring them back into the arena of real life.

[Pattern-chaser]

Thanks for making the thread. I too am more interested in the practical application of philosophical ideas than their role in a purely theoretical environment. Specifically, I enjoy the intersection of psychological drivers on the human ability to work within a philosophical framework.

Yes, if philosophy does not apply to 'real' life then I reject it, not as incorrect but as useless (to me). As far as I am able, I actually follow the principles that I write about here. I do not care, for example, to speculate about Objective knowledge because I have no access to it. It is an intellectual cul-de-sac. As such, it offers no benefit to living my real life. So yes, I completely agree with you.

"Philosophical drivers"? Care to expand on that?

[LuckyR]

Thanks for making the thread. I too am more interested in the practical application of philosophical ideas than their role in a purely theoretical environment. Specifically, I enjoy the intersection of psychological drivers on the human ability to work within a philosophical framework.

Yes, if philosophy does not apply to 'real' life then I reject it, not as incorrect but as useless (to me). As far as I am able, I actually follow the principles that I write about here. I do not care, for example, to speculate about Objective knowledge because I have no access to it. It is an intellectual cul-de-sac. As such, it offers no benefit to living my real life. So yes, I completely agree with you.

"Philosophical drivers"? Care to expand on that?

I wrote: "psychological drivers" actually.

[JackDaydream]

Philosophical or psychological drives? Perhaps, it is about the engines or energies of deep seated motivations and the two may switch in their key roles.

For anyone interested in the topic, I had mentioned how cognitive behavioral therapy seems to address the nature of beliefs. Also, I am aware that there is an overlap between Stoicism and CBT. One book which I have read is 'Change Thinking With CBT: Overcome Stress, Combat Anxiety and Improve Your Life', by Dr Sarah Edelman(2006). She looks at the way thoughts are passing whereas beliefs are more stable, but that beliefs can give rise to difficulties. Some of the aspects are black and white thinking, overgeneralisation and, also, a sense of what is fair or not. She speaks of the 'just world' fallacy, in which people often 'expect the world to be fair, or at least that we should always be treated fairly'. The difficulty is 'that it does not match with what happens in the real world'. I know that I struggle with this, with so many knocks and blows in life. Certainly, CBT is not about wishful or positive thinking, as a way of eradicating difficulties but about confronting and working with them effectively.

One aspect of thinking which Edelman points to is the value of Socratic questions. She summarises the following few for reflection:
'What are the facts and what are my subjective perceptions?
What evidence supports my perceptions?
What evidence contradicts my perceptions?
Am I making any thinking errors?
How else can I perceive this situation?'

The questions don't solve life's dilemmas or difficulties, and sidestep some of the existential questions of existence, but they are a starting point for dealing with experience, with its ups and too many downs.

[JDBowden]

Philosophical or psychological drives? Perhaps, it is about the engines or energies of deep seated motivations and the two may switch in their key roles.

For anyone interested in the topic, I had mentioned how cognitive behavioral therapy seems to address the nature of beliefs. Also, I am aware that there is an overlap between Stoicism and CBT. One book which I have read is 'Change Thinking With CBT: Overcome Stress, Combat Anxiety and Improve Your Life', by Dr Sarah Edelman(2006). She looks at the way thoughts are passing whereas beliefs are more stable, but that beliefs can give rise to difficulties. Some of the aspects are black and white thinking, overgeneralisation and, also, a sense of what is fair or not. She speaks of the 'just world' fallacy, in which people often 'expect the world to be fair, or at least that we should always be treated fairly'. The difficulty is 'that it does not match with what happens in the real world'. I know that I struggle with this, with so many knocks and blows in life. Certainly, CBT is not about wishful or positive thinking, as a way of eradicating difficulties but about confronting and working with them effectively.

One aspect of thinking which Edelman points to is the value of Socratic questions. She summarises the following few for reflection:
'What are the facts and what are my subjective perceptions?
What evidence supports my perceptions?
What evidence contradicts my perceptions?
Am I making any thinking errors?
How else can I perceive this situation?'

The questions don't solve life's dilemmas or difficulties, and sidestep some of the existential questions of existence, but they are a starting point for dealing with experience, with its ups and too many downs.

You beat me to it. I was about to bring Stoicism and CBT into the thread here. Personally, I tend to gravitate towards Stoicism for my daily life/activities. Perhaps, I am attracted to it as it has more of an objectionable pathway such as different exercises to physically put into play (a view from above; memento mori; amor fati; practicing "poverty"; outlining what is/is not within ones control; etc.) I highly respect other fields of philosophy. However, I tend to back away from them as I (personally) struggle to see how it could benefit my lifestyle. I view them more in the "theory" category.

Thank you for that CBT book recommendation. I will have to check it out and would like to know more about CBT in general. I must admit, my knowledge on said subject is limited.

This thread also reminded me of college students going out and protesting/destroying things. Their violence is enraged by theory and what sounds good and looks good on paper. Yet, at the end of the day these theories have never been tried, tested, or if so, have failed. Example: I live in Chile and in October 2019 students led the charge which sparked a near civil war which literally, burned the city of Santiago to the ground, all based off of economic theory which could never, ever, come true in any situation. Pure theory, no experience. I am tired of watching my city burn to the ground based off of these ideas.

[JackDaydream]

Philosophical or psychological drives? Perhaps, it is about the engines or energies of deep seated motivations and the two may switch in their key roles.

For anyone interested in the topic, I had mentioned how cognitive behavioral therapy seems to address the nature of beliefs. Also, I am aware that there is an overlap between Stoicism and CBT. One book which I have read is 'Change Thinking With CBT: Overcome Stress, Combat Anxiety and Improve Your Life', by Dr Sarah Edelman(2006). She looks at the way thoughts are passing whereas beliefs are more stable, but that beliefs can give rise to difficulties. Some of the aspects are black and white thinking, overgeneralisation and, also, a sense of what is fair or not. She speaks of the 'just world' fallacy, in which people often 'expect the world to be fair, or at least that we should always be treated fairly'. The difficulty is 'that it does not match with what happens in the real world'. I know that I struggle with this, with so many knocks and blows in life. Certainly, CBT is not about wishful or positive thinking, as a way of eradicating difficulties but about confronting and working with them effectively.

One aspect of thinking which Edelman points to is the value of Socratic questions. She summarises the following few for reflection:
'What are the facts and what are my subjective perceptions?
What evidence supports my perceptions?
What evidence contradicts my perceptions?
Am I making any thinking errors?
How else can I perceive this situation?'

The questions don't solve life's dilemmas or difficulties, and sidestep some of the existential questions of existence, but they are a starting point for dealing with experience, with its ups and too many downs.

You beat me to it. I was about to bring Stoicism and CBT into the thread here. Personally, I tend to gravitate towards Stoicism for my daily life/activities. Perhaps, I am attracted to it as it has more of an objectionable pathway such as different exercises to physically put into play (a view from above; memento mori; amor fati; practicing "poverty"; outlining what is/is not within ones control; etc.) I highly respect other fields of philosophy. However, I tend to back away from them as I (personally) struggle to see how it could benefit my lifestyle. I view them more in the "theory" category.

Thank you for that CBT book recommendation. I will have to check it out and would like to know more about CBT in general. I must admit, my knowledge on said subject is limited.

This thread also reminded me of college students going out and protesting/destroying things. Their violence is enraged by theory and what sounds good and looks good on paper. Yet, at the end of the day these theories have never been tried, tested, or if so, have failed. Example: I live in Chile and in October 2019 students led the charge which sparked a near civil war which literally, burned the city of Santiago to the ground, all based off of economic theory which could never, ever, come true in any situation. Pure theory, no experience. I am tired of watching my city burn to the ground based off of these ideas.

There is just so much on the topic of cognitive behavioral therapy online and in books. I would probably recommend Albert Ellis and Aaron Beck because they are the founding writers. Of course, it is important to remember that it is a form of therapy primarily. I have not had CBT but have seen it used in clinical settings and know people who have had CBT. Nevertheless, I have read on the topic and found the ideas in the therapy approach to be helpful in my philosophical understanding and it was only a year ago that I became aware of the parallels with Stoic philosophy. It is an area which could be researched further as an area for the pursuit of philosophy for living.

[EricPH]

I am aware that reflection on experiences are central to my own philosophy quest. Do you think that you are influenced by what happens in your life too?

In the voluntary work I do, I almost feel it is best to have the least possible knowledge when confronted by a new encounter. We wonder the streets of our town until around 4am on a Saturday morning, we care about our town, we listen and we help when we can. I had fifty hours of training and have about fifteen years of past experience. Angry drunken fights up to about fifty people, bottles and knives used as weapons, suicide, people sat on walls at the top of multi storey car parks, depression, despair. When I go out this Friday night, I don't know what we shall be confronted with.

No matter how desperate a situation might seem, I have survived them so far, and have never been hit. I know what I have been through, and it seems extraordinary to have never been hurt. I know this could change.

All the theories, statistics, what if questions, risk theories are of little use. When we are confronted with a situation, we often have seconds to react. At the age of 73, I understand I am probably the weakest person in any situation, we carry no protection, we don't do self defence.

I understand there are probably many theories that say we should not do what we do. But before we go out, we pray that God will place in our path all the people we need to see. We pray for the words and actions to spread God's love in our town, for peace and protection. Once we have handed the evening over to God, we go, and whatever happens, happens. We don't talk about God, unless someone first asks us.

[Pattern-chaser]

Thanks for making the thread. I too am more interested in the practical application of philosophical ideas than their role in a purely theoretical environment. Specifically, I enjoy the intersection of psychological drivers on the human ability to work within a philosophical framework.

Yes, if philosophy does not apply to 'real' life then I reject it, not as incorrect but as useless (to me). As far as I am able, I actually follow the principles that I write about here. I do not care, for example, to speculate about Objective knowledge because I have no access to it. It is an intellectual cul-de-sac. As such, it offers no benefit to living my real life. So yes, I completely agree with you.

"Philosophical drivers"? Care to expand on that?

I wrote: "psychological drivers" actually.

Yes, you did. I commented in the hope that you might expand upon these psychological drivers...?

[Pattern-chaser]

I am aware that there is an overlap between Stoicism and CBT.

...

CBT is about confronting and working effectively with difficulties. [Edited for brevity and clarity.]

This disturbs me a little. Whenever I think about CBT, I remember that gay conversion therapy is only CBT, applied in a coercive, and sometimes violent, way. Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA), as used on autists, is very similar, and was developed by the same team, for the same purpose(s). Both of these things, as they are implemented/used, are violent applications of aversion therapy, torturous assaults upon victims whose 'attributes' are inconvenient for the 'typical' majority.

I will try to think carefully, in a properly considered fashion, about the "overlap between Stoicism and CBT". But if you can assist, I will be grateful. At the start of my consideration, I see Stoicism and CBT as being poles apart, in almost every way possible.

[JackDaydream]

I am aware that reflection on experiences are central to my own philosophy quest. Do you think that you are influenced by what happens in your life too?

In the voluntary work I do, I almost feel it is best to have the least possible knowledge when confronted by a new encounter. We wonder the streets of our town until around 4am on a Saturday morning, we care about our town, we listen and we help when we can. I had fifty hours of training and have about fifteen years of past experience. Angry drunken fights up to about fifty people, bottles and knives used as weapons, suicide, people sat on walls at the top of multi storey car parks, depression, despair. When I go out this Friday night, I don't know what we shall be confronted with.

No matter how desperate a situation might seem, I have survived them so far, and have never been hit. I know what I have been through, and it seems extraordinary to have never been hurt. I know this could change.

All the theories, statistics, what if questions, risk theories are of little use. When we are confronted with a situation, we often have seconds to react. At the age of 73, I understand I am probably the weakest person in any situation, we carry no protection, we don't do self defence.

I understand there are probably many theories that say we should not do what we do. But before we go out, we pray that God will place in our path all the people we need to see. We pray for the words and actions to spread God's love in our town, for peace and protection. Once we have handed the evening over to God, we go, and whatever happens, happens. We don't talk about God, unless someone first asks us.

I do agree with you that theories are often not that important in some situations. Having worked in mental health nursing it does seem so variable and if one really adhered to theory all the time it would hinder rather than help because, sometimes, responses require a certain amount of intuition. It is also often about a certain unbiased approach as a way of openness and understanding.

Saying that, it may be that awareness of theories as an aspect of understanding, including psychological and philosophy ones develop knowledge which help in the development of oneself as a person.

However, the difference between preference for a theory and putting it into practice are different. I once knew someone who had a great liking for Carl Rogers' philosophy of unconditional love and made me aware of this way of thinking. However, I was disturbed a couple of months later when I discovered that the person seemed to be someone who had expectations from his friends which seemed contradictory. Having ideas and putting them into practice are very different.

[Pattern-chaser]

Having ideas and putting them into practice are very different.

Yes, the simple proverb "practice what you preach" didn't emerge from nowhere!

[JackDaydream]

I am aware that there is an overlap between Stoicism and CBT.

...

CBT is about confronting and working effectively with difficulties. [Edited for brevity and clarity.]

This disturbs me a little. Whenever I think about CBT, I remember that gay conversion therapy is only CBT, applied in a coercive, and sometimes violent, way. Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA), as used on autists, is very similar, and was developed by the same team, for the same purpose(s). Both of these things, as they are implemented/used, are violent applications of aversion therapy, torturous assaults upon victims whose 'attributes' are inconvenient for the 'typical' majority.

I will try to think carefully, in a properly considered fashion, about the "overlap between Stoicism and CBT". But if you can assist, I will be grateful. At the start of my consideration, I see Stoicism and CBT as being poles apart, in almost every way possible.

My understanding is that gay aversion therapy was one of the earliest forms of CBT, and probably the worst possible forms. In terms of practice, the one area which does seem to be helpful is in obsessive compulsive therapy. The difference here is that the goals are directed by the people's wishes and are not based on a set agenda.

I have done some work with people on the autistic spectrum, mainly art interventions. However, I must say that I did wonder about some of the CBT therapies which some of these people were receiving, if they are too focused on behavioral changes. Even some people who have CBT for OCD have sometimes found that the CBT is too focused on outer behaviour as opposed to the exploration of the person's experiences.

To some extent, it may be that the quality of the therapy a person has is dependent on the level of understanding of the individual therapist, no matter what school of therapy they adhere too. Perhaps, philosophy should be part of therapy training or even the training in mental health care. I have often wondered about whether the fact that psychiatrists are trained in sciences, gives a bias in their outlook. Going back to CBT though, one idea which I did see as particularly useful was the idea of becoming one's own therapist and I take this on board in my own psychological and philosophy quest.
.