|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,908 Year: 4,165/9,624 Month: 1,036/974 Week: 363/286 Day: 6/13 Hour: 1/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Thank You Adam Smith. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
prophex writes: I'll tell you one thing! If nothing else, in order to respond to your topic I had to go and read about Adam Smith again. I DO have a fairly decent philosophy book by Louis L. Snyder that summerizes the impact of many of the philosophers in history. I didn't want to revise the OP, I think I would ruin it's highly controversial nature, and taint it's original qualities. It is what it is you know? Snyder writes of Smith: quote: Apparantly, Adam Smith was highly influential in shaping the economic policy of many future learned thinkers and leaders and by extension the foreign policy of their nations. I had an interesting philosophy discussion with the clerk at the gas station the other day. My question was this:If Henry Ford had never invented the Model T, would automobiles later have been invented anyway, and would they have turned out to eventually "evolve" the same way? The point that I was trying to impress and elaborate on was the idea of whether or not humanity ever has an original thought. In other words, do we actually create things that never would otherwise exist? (This includes ideas as well as tangible goods) Back when I was a staunch Biblical Literalist, I could defend my personal philosophy simply by quoting the Bible. I no longer idolize the Bible itself, and am unafraid to question anything about my beliefs that comes up---but I still believe that Christ is the origin of all creativity, truth, and love. If Adam Smith had not influenced the course of history, would another man have merely stepped in his place? Is history predestined to arrive at a logical (or illogical) philosophical conclusion, and are humans simply doomed without Christ? Im bringing this up because I want to see if your opinions and beliefs have changed in the past three years.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
I don't think he invented anything, really. I do think that he stimulated popular thinking and conclusions that shaped foreign policy.
Any idea that has ever formed influences future ideas, don't you think? Darwin certainly influenced the thinking of many scientists. It was said of Isaac Newton at one point that "Newton was Science." Are you suggesting that if a person were never ezxposed to educational ideas that they would never form their own internal prejudices and beliefs? Or would the predestination of the individual evolve into a similar outcome? Experience is the best teacher, right? Would you be the same had you never been a soldier? Edited by Phat, : spelling
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Forcing me to show my hand, eh?
Charles, I have never read Adam Smiths entire book. Smith did say that consumption was the sole end and purpose of all production. Lets get back to ideas. If you were a teacher, you would be a producer of ideas. Would you expect your class to be obedient little clones who internalized your ideas and went forth attempting to win converts?or Would you expect your class to study diligently, comparing and contrasting your ideas with those of others whom they had read? Would you insist that your students questioned everything?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Wow, Brian! Thats a great link, and it shows me the unique thinking capabilities of John Nash. If Nash had never existed, could his theories have evolved through other human vessels?
Moreover---what is the source of Nash's genius??
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
RR writes: There are certain ideas that a student has to accept; otherwise we can't proceed with the course. Does a serious student of Adam Smith have to understand everything that Smith wrote? I certainly don't feel the need to. My interaction is with prophex and with the rest of you---not in defending or attacking Adam Smith.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Brian writes: Did Smith (indirectly of course)have anything to do with training Russian linesmen in the 1960's? If you believe in the butterfly effect you may then extrapolate that every human interaction throughout history of itself produces enormous changes to the entire social paradigm. In knowing you, I believe that my ideas about religion, atheism, human nobility, and Scottish Pubs has changed! By flapping your wings in Scotland, you made a Phat difference in Denver!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Im trying to google the Times article...it sounds interesting.
prophex writes: Collectively, the words and ideas of the human race are the summation of progress. Doesn't say much for the mathematical genius that invests. Doesn't say much for almost all of the human race today does it? We need to remain optimistic. We can't act like Solomon in Ecclesiastes. He may well have been right in his conclusions, but in an educational setting, I believe that we should be encouraged to talk about silver linings and not clouds. I was birthed in fundamentalism, though not so much creationism as you were. They say that an expert at counterfeit money becomes an expert, not by studying counterfeit money but by studying real money. I used to have disdain for atheistic thinking, but one thing that my friends who are not believers have taught me is that if I wish to be a good Christian apologist, I would do well to study the culture of Christianity rather than the culture of atheism and freethinking. Its like you said once, though. I believe because I was touched---not because I was brainwashed. Keep up your studies, dood. Don't be afraid to learn new ideas.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
I waste most of my time in chat!
It is the lazy mans way out---one does not have to think as much in real time as they do if they are writing a paper (or a post) I can't speak for Charlie, but I was under the impression that he wanted this topic to be more about the free flow of ideas in general, rather than a critique on Adam Smith specifically. If not, I have nothing to say---you are right!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Brian writes: I think everyone would benefit from taking a history course, especially one about what history actually is.Phat writes: I know very little about world history. I took a course in European History a couple of years ago---but I am naive as to the evolution of ideas from a global perspective. If someone is a deep thinker, and dwells on the ills of the world, then taking a philosophy course could lead to real psychological problems.Phat writes: Sometimes, I think that we dwell on the problems of others (including the world) in order to avoid concentrating on our own problems. Please note that I am in no way suggesting that this relates to prophex, but I have seen at first hand some very messed up students on philosophy courses. When I returned to college in my early forties, I was amazed at how many 18-22 year olds are in such a hurry to get through college. It is the only time when they can discuss ideas with other people without being tied down by a job or the demands and responsibilities of everyday life. If I had it to do over again, I would have attended college and taken six years to graduate--while working part time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
schrafinator writes:
Open reciprocity was very simple. If I lived near a forest and you lived near the sea, I could provide you with wood in exchange for you providing me with fish. Reciprocity has always existed. Why is that bad? It became complicated when money was invented. For one thing, the reciprocity became fixed and closed. I dont like it when the marketplace drives the prices. It means that I have to work for less because some cheap labor is willing to work less. The banking system is also a villain. What sense does it make when money can be multiplied? For example, if I deposit $1000.00 in the bank and the bank loans you $1000.00, the $1000.00 has essentially become $3000.00. On paper, I am worth $1000.00.at the same moment,the bank lists its assets as $1000.00 in the hope that I keep them there. At the same moment, you have $1000.00 in your hand, although you will owe them $1007.00 payback. That certainly seems like a corrupt system. I can't quite put a handle on why, except to suggest that it keeps the rich richer and the poor working harder.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Im no expert at economics, but I have a rhetorical question for someone with a basic grasp of world economics:
Can Capitalism successfully exist as the only free market system in the world without people to exploit? In other words, if too many people get on the boat, will the whole boat sink? Sorry if I sound ignorant, because I basically am!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
CK writes: I know Phat will promote anything with your name on it (and it's pretty shameful he did - an adult should look out for a child, not set him up to look a fool in front of people)Phat writes: Thats how he learns to think. Bouncing ideas off of men such as you. YOU want to consider how silly and immature it makes you look when you try and play the big intellectual and then have to blow off the questions because you don't have a sufficent level of education to engage in the conversation. This conversation is light---and it is simple practice.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
gasby writes: I'd rather see you fathering them a little bit. OK, even though I am not a biological father, I will attempt to share some good advice. 1)Emotion does not settle issues of truth. 2)Tradition is not always right. 3)Do not give human authority figures uncritical allegiance. 4)Be careful of the way you use words. Words are tools. They must be used properly and carefully. 5)Do not force people into limited or false options. 6)Do not use name-calling or put-downs as a debate tactic (argumentum ad hominem). 7)Be careful of accusations based solely on the presumed origin of a given idea or practice (the genetic fallacy). The popularity or unpopularity of something does not make it either true or false. 8)The fact that something is either an old or a new idea does not automatically make it correct (chronological snobbery). 9)Be careful in the use of “guilt by association.” Do not dismiss good ideas or practices by letting your imagination take them to inappropriate extremes. 10)Be prudent when using the “slippery slope” argument (not all slopes are slippery; i.e. “b” does not necessarily follow “a” in all cases.). 11)Be alert to cause and effect errors (post hoc propter hoc).Make sure that conclusions follow from adequate evidence and support (non sequitur does not follow). Do not accept clichés or popular slogans uncritically. 12)Do not “stack the deck,” i.e. only point out observations that support your pet theory, ignoring all evidence to the contrary. 13)Be wary of generalization. Remember that the truth is not always in the middle. 14)Do not take ideas or people out of context. 15)Understand that spiritual discernment means being ready to admit to weakness or limitation in that very gift; being willing to abandon “shortcuts” in return for the demanding spiritual disciplines that produce lasting fruit; and resisting the temptation to judge the hearts of others.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
prophex writes: I used to feel very frustrated when I attempted to share my beliefs and faith and was dismissed so readily by others. I too lashed out at them and felt as if it was an attack of the Devil. Later, as I actually listened to how others think (even those who have never encountered the Spirit) I became more adept at communicating with all types of people. I am actually glad that I never hung out with the church crowd. (AiG, creationists, and fundamentalists) Truthfully, I don't disagree with much of their theologic philosophy, but yet I DO prefer grinding it out with secular educated philosophies. They told me that I was doing you no favor by promoting this topic, but the motivations that I had and have for promoting this topic were not centered so much on Adam Smith as on philosophy in general. I created a short paragraph. In this short paragraph I used Adam Smith who has come to represent Capitalism's name.Phat writes:
People asked me if I actually knew anything about Adam Smith. Simple people like CK, and Archer, who I have lost all hope for... They critisized me for promoting this topic. You know what they said. I have a response:Attention, critics: I don't promote EVERYTHING that either of the twins proposes. They will tell you that. It is true that I am biased towards topics with prophex or messenjah, and that I enjoy dialogue with them. What you folks dont understand, though, is that this topic is NOT about Adam Smith so much as it is about worldly philosophies versus spiritual philosophie. Phat writes:
This all may seem ludacris coming from someone who hasn't even read Adam Smith, viewed as a weakness, and milked for all that it was worth by people who would rather focus on my personal credentials, rather than the actual ideas of my initial post. I am gonna critisize you for referring to these EvC colleagues as simple. CK is an atheist, to be sure, but he has had numerous life experiences which I would have hoped would have contributed positively towards our philosophical discourse. As for Archer, I dont yet know his style well enough to critisize him.Phat writes: I was told to go read a book, and told that I could not have a decent discussion with someone who is quite blantantly the definition of a simpleton, who can't think outside of what a book based on trivialities has to say. and I believe that I KNEW your actual ideas. Thats why I promoted you.I am quite amazed at how this all went down. Disgusted actually. Phat writes:
Can't you see that economic theory has no bearing on reality, it's an illusion, open your eyes. You have been critisized for coming across as arrogant and critical of others. I empathize with the fact that they don't give you instant respect like I do. You have to earn it with this debate crowd, and they view the lessons as an example of tough love. You know i'm easy on you---but I believe that the type of dialogues that we engage in are conducive to sparking further thought. Phat writes:
I GUESS I'M JUST TRYING TO SAY THAT THIS POST WASN'T ABOUT YOUR DEAD THEORIES THAT HOLD NO IMPORTANCE IN THE EYES OF GOD, AND THANK YOU ALL FOR SUCKING ME INTO IT, AND BRINGING ME DOWN WITH YOU INTO THE FIERY PITS OF MEANINGLESSNESS, MEDIOCRITY, AND MINDLESSNESS. I know where you are coming from on this, but I want to encourage you to move beyond the truths that you know. Even IF I believe certain absolute truths, it never hurts me to expand my thinking and study up a little bit on how the other scholars or critics see an issue.Phat writes:
None of you know anything.. jar was right, this discussion is worthless. You don't deserve me, you don't deserve my thoughts, you don't deserve any of what I can tell you. Because you ignore it as it hits you in the face, you can't comprehend it, and you respond spouting what is fake. You respond with nothing but ignorance, and you claim it is me who is ignorant. Again, perhaps it IS my fault for promoting this topic and throwing you into the Lions Den of intellectuals. I have yet to hear your personal thoughts on this issue, and this may not be the place to hear them. Its up to you, C. Phat writes:
You are most likely going to respond saying I should go read the works of Smith. But there is no brilliance there, there is only emptiness, and false truths. Go back and read what you just said. Do you really feel that way, or are you just angry that you arn't getting any respect? Lets take ten deep breaths, play a few chords on the guitar, and resume the discussion. Phat writes:
Anti-Christ. Like I said, I knew that you were going deeper than Adam Smith. I viewed your opening post as an emotional bit of song lyrics, actually. The way that I saw your opening post, you were lamenting the blindness of Western Intellect in general--contrasting with the simple truths of Christ. (was that what you were thinking?) Since you were the Topic Starter, tell me (and the audience) where you want this topic to go from here. Do you want to focus on the differences between worldly and spiritual philosophies? I can certainly take us there, if you wish. Lets refocus.I may critisize your conclusions, but I will never critisize you personally, no matter how much teen overconfidance you appear to have. "They" may not get it, but I think that I do. P.S. Im just lazy---thats the reason I don't go after some of the other wise ones. Keep communicating! Edited by Phat, : added jabberwocky. Edited by Phat, : clarification situation “There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, "All right, then, have it your way” --C.S.Lewis
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18349 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
CK writes: Depends on what you look like!
Maybe if I put up a picture with a nice smile I get some slack as well, right?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024