poetry critical

online poetry workshop



cause by love
hank

philosophy is not a causal science
 1

29 May 18

Rated 8 (8) by 2 users.
Active (2): 6, 10
Inactive (0):

(define the words in this poem)
(463 more poems by this author)



Add A Comment:
Enter the following text to post as unknown: captcha

Comments:

it is to real philosophers. we look at how a thing is described. we don't think that the description is a direct knowledge of reality, only an impression and therefore 'causal'. things seem so -- rationality works only because a form 'feels right', not because you can see structure as a reflection of some cosmic order. even the notion of cosmic order is derivative from stargazing. nothing is real except what you make as you make it.

for instance, how real is this poem? it seems about as real as a cricket's love song in 'cricket'. fine, if you're another cricket, but empty if you're a butterfly.
 — cadmium

We are all ‘real’ philosophers. Unless you count the elitist band of brothers who consider the common man not academic enough to form a simple template of a topic and it’s varible applications, and only ‘they’, the ‘real philosophers’ have a view worthy of consideration.
This poem is just a feeble sentence really, and in my view, and on its own, a bit presumptuous to award a title.
It’s like putting up - Quantum physics is not science, black holes my arse.- and calling that a poem. It would be getting away with it big time.
 — matrinh20

no, a philosopher does negation, paring down gossip and chatter about what's what into what's actually, personally, your own knowledge.

what you're talking about is what you can say and not say according to your belief system. you think i'm not following the truth because i say that knowing isn't a blessing.

when we're poets we invent phrases and expess them into ordinary life. poets invent poetry, philosophers invent nothing. art is everything and art creates what you believe. make more art.
 — cadmium

There is a lot to be said on postulating the abstract,and massaging our egos but also to consider the feasible, rational, creditable and logical.
 — matrinh20

All homo sapians of at least normal intellect are capable of thought without conventional parameters unless severely indoctrinated otherwise. Which is an interesting topic in itself.
 — matrinh20

philosophy isn't about thought, it's about the representation of reality with language. thought can't be known by the verbal. therefore, thought can't be thought about. we express the product of thinking as a physical product -- as a phrase or a picture or a sound, or even by touching. there's nothing special about thought except that it's a reaction to our physical reality. that means that thought is good, because we have know other way of knowing the meaning or value -- danger or desire -- of what's in front of our noses.

just knowing some truth doesn't make you special. you can believe the world is flat and it wouldn't change the world at all. the totality of people is still not the world. what you learned is a 'philosopher' doesn't make you a philosopher, unless you really analyze where and how you learned to say 'philosopher'.  
 — cadmium

what i'm saying is that philosophers don't discover metaphysical truths, they just make them go away. we're poets. we invent truth, invent beliefs. we even invent god. we're so much more than philosophers.

but, the poets are always able to work on several verbal levels. we have to think like a poet, but also like a philosopher and an engineer and a child. none of the academic philosophers would ever want to be a poet. fuck them. they're mostly just pushing some belief system their small IQ's can cope with, on kids whose IQ's aren't even finished yet.
 — cadmium

I beg to differ, the fundamental and undeniable fact is that thought is everything and philosophy would not exist without it. The only alternative to thought is the automatic instincts that don’t require an intellectual template.
 — matrinh20

Although I can accept some of the aspects of your argument in regards to poetry
 — matrinh20

Have I had the last word? Oh, good!
 — matrinh20

show me a "thought" by only thinking it, not verbalizing it. think more about ghis word game you're calling "thinking".

sorry, it's not a contest. having tbe last word is t.v. shit. i talk to build the concept, not fill my balls.
 — cadmium

See what I’ve done there, I’ve activated a ego related response. Without much difficulty
 — matrinh20

help me build the idea by showing me how though is word. not by telling me to shut up.

how is thought related to feeling? does feeling express itself on us in grammar? has thought a grammar? is logic representing a non-verbal grammar? do i paint in a grammar? ... how about poetry? is tgere a grammar of poetry along side a wording grammar?
 — cadmium

It’s so much simpler than that. It’s not rocket science. It’s what we are all capable of without dressing it up to be much more than it is.
 — matrinh20

you don't think that your 'simplicity' isnxt one of your conventionalized, indoctrinated, "non-free ideas"? itxs much simpler than you think. a grammar is the conditions in a world space which allow you to understand in that world.
 — cadmium

all this energy on something that is not  a haiku
 — unknown

Art and creativity all stem from free thought.tangible imagery is associated with  the grammatical to form poetry in its elevated form
 — matrinh20

well, it does tire the brain bowl. thanks to both of you for the lessons.
 — cadmium

philosophy is for the intellect
 — unknown

0.341s