5 ms·
> Supporting the odd philosopher poet is the exact function of society, in my opinion. Have you considered that society should also be the natural predator of
by SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
> Supporting the odd philosopher poet is the exact function of society, in my opinion.
Have you considered that society should also be the natural predator of the odd philosopher poet so that their numbers do not become problematic for their environment?
- wizzwizz4 5y agoLook: a “social Darwinist”! I should get a spotter's guide. If society preys on philosopher poets, we don't get philosophy or poetry, our ethics never develops, and the fundamental principles of society don't improve, limiting how much technological progress can raise the standard of living. I personally call that a bad outcome.
- mgraczyk 5y agoI don't think it's accurate to claim that ethics follows moral philosophy, and certainly most philosophers would not endorse that viewpoint. Philosophy doesn't tell society how to improve or behave. Philosophy helps question and understand, it hasn't historically been a driver of change.
- wizzwizz4 5y agoDriver? No. Heck, I hardly know any philosophers. But most of our big ideas were written down by a philosopher and then, decades later, read by to-be-important people at the beginnings of a social movement. Social philosophy influences societal change, by providing ideas. Without philosophers, activists have to be more visionary than they already are, making them rarer. (Moral philosophy, not really, I'll agree with you.)
- wizzwizz4 5y ago> Philosophy helps question and understand, it hasn't historically been a driver of change. Why do you say understanding isn't a driver of change? It seems to be pretty important to me.
- craftinator 5y ago> Philosophy helps question and understand, it hasn't historically been a driver of change. You kind of put your foot in it with this comment. Societal change, for the most part, directly follows questioning and understanding.
- Aeolun 5y agoI mean, to some extend they’re self regulating. Few people have the stomach for a life like that so the total amount of philosopher poets is likely a function of your total population.
- nwienert 5y agoHow many crazed homeless drug addicts per philosopher poet do you find acceptable? Is it somewhere near the current 10k to 1 level? Of course you are willing to patronize a cabal of homeless on your block as well.
- mikem170 5y agoOur society used to have places for these people, like farmhand jobs, cheap poor houses in the city, etc. Perhaps it is a failure on our part that we have now have nothing better for these people then a desire to push them out of sight. It seems they get a lot of blame for not being able to keep up with an increasingly demanding modern consumerist society.
- Aeolun 5y ago> How many crazed homeless drug addicts per philosopher poet do you find acceptable? I think the only acceptable number is zero. The philosopher poet clearly desires this life. The crazed homeless drug addict would much rather inject his morphine at home. In other words, I think the fact that a drug addict is homeless is incidental. They should be treated because they’re a drug addict, not because they’re homeless.
- code_duck 5y agoThere are civil ways to discourage such behavior short of predation.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- TheRealPomax 5y agoWhy would society need to even be a predator though? The whole point of society is that we organized into large enough groups that what the "natural order" was no longer applies: societies literally rise above the natural order by replacing that order with something we as society control. That means things like corporations, and working hard for your money, but also means things like "meaningless art", and allowing people with permanent disabilities to still live a normal life, where the fruits of society get to be enjoyed by everyone in society, skewed towards different demographics based on your favourite -ism. And it doesn't matter which -ism you subscribe to: the whole point of society is that we don't need this ridiculous "natural" nonsense. We beat it. It can stay outside. We replaced it with society.
- markzzerella 5y ago>the whole point of society is that we don't need this ridiculous "natural" nonsense. We beat it. It can stay outside. We replaced it with society. When the silent part is said out loud. "We" didn't beat anything, and "we" certainly aren't gods that managed to counter natural law, despite the current zeitgeist that likes to pretend it is so. Humans are predators, and to pretend otherwise will be the folly of our species. One need not look any further than the political, corporate, or social elite to see what predators look like in so-called civilized society.