My Disibility

[pljames]

I have a reading and writing disibility. I can't understand verbs and nouns, so I look at the sentence as it's suppose to relate to the paragraph. I use an English correction software called Grammarly which helps me greatly and overcomes my disibility. Concerning my quest for understanding others writings my fanaticism over arguing will be just my opinion instead.

 

I still maintain Philosophy "the love of wisdom" follows these principles,

The discretionary use of knowledge for the greatest good.

The ability to apply relevant knowledge in an insightful way, especially to different situations from that in which the knowledge was gained.

The ability to make a decision based on the combination of knowledge, experience, and intuitive understanding.

(theology) The ability to know and apply spiritual truths. follows these principles.

 

With so many meanings it is hard to just stick with one meaning. Paul

[CraigD]

I have a reading and writing disibility. I can't understand verbs and nouns, so I look at the sentence as it's suppose to relate to the paragraph. I use an English correction software called Grammarly which helps me greatly and overcomes my disibility.

That you “can’t understand verbs and nouns” seems an overly broad and far-fetched a diagnosis, Paul.

 

Can you understand written and spoken English (and any other languages you know)? Can you speak quickly, and with reasonably correct grammer?

 

If you can do these, but have difficulty writing, you’re suffering from what can very broadly be categorized under dyslexia, as opposed to a more severe and pervasive disorder that would be categorized under aphasia.

 

A disorder like you have is not necessarily a bad thing, because being forced to consciously think about how to do things that others do automatically means you are thinking often about something profound – language – that many people think about rarely or not at all. IMO, thinking about things is what makes people wise.

 

I still maintain Philosophy "the love of wisdom" follows these principles,

The discretionary use of knowledge for the greatest good.

The ability to apply relevant knowledge in an insightful way, especially to different situations from that in which the knowledge was gained.

The ability to make a decision based on the combination of knowledge, experience, and intuitive understanding.

(theology) The ability to know and apply spiritual truths. follows these principles.

I was taught, at a young age, by someone I though a good philosopher, that the most important philosophical principle is expressed in what he termed the central maxim of philosophy:

 

Seldom affirm, never deny, always distinguish.

I’ve had no experience that inclined me to doubt this.

 

The principle you’ve written here, Paul, seem to me more moral philosophical conclusions than fundamental philosophical principles. One might, and many have, argued that applied moral philosophy is more important than general philosophy, but usually that argument is intended to apply to people in general, not philosophers as a class.

 

As a matter of formal terminology, “theology” means literally the study of a necessarily single supreme being who created and sustains the universe, so is, I think, too narrow a term for what you intend. Likewise, “spiritual”, though it lacks as well-defined a consensus meaning as “theology”, had a lot of supernatural baggage.

 

I recommend you reconsider whether what you mean in your last-listed principle above is inherently related to the theos (God), spirits, and the supernatural, or rather related only to the morality branch of philosophy – in short, the question of how to define and distinguish right and wrong.

 

I’ve a personal stake in this distinction, as I’m an atheist – one who thinks God does not exist other than as a fictional character and concept – and a bright – one who believes that everything real is natural, none of it supernatural. As such, I think that people who believe in gods or the supernatural are fundamentally wrong.

 

With so many meanings it is hard to just stick with one meaning.

The plethora of catagories and meanings in philosophy are our friends. They help us distinguish.

[pljames]

Craig D,

I think you have found something I didn't see, the word dyslexia. Can one overcome it? I tend to go overboard with trying to be understood, now I might have a idea on why I do. I try to hard. You struck a nerve when you said the word profound, which tells me I try to hard. Yes I understand the English language spoken, but I believe I am trying to hard in writing it. I get disgusted trying to understand everybody's meanings of one word called philosophy. I seem to "go out there" and lose myself in trying to describe ten thousand ways to define the word philosophy.

 

I think I have been where no man has gone before! Thank you for you patience's and understanding.Please critique this as well. Paul

 

 

 

 

 

 

That you “can’t understand verbs and nouns” seems an overly broad and far-fetched a diagnosis, Paul.

 

Can you understand written and spoken English (and any other languages you know)? Can you speak quickly, and with reasonably correct grammer?

 

If you can do these, but have difficulty writing, you’re suffering from what can very broadly be categorized under dyslexia, as opposed to a more severe and pervasive disorder that would be categorized under aphasia.

 

A disorder like you have is not necessarily a bad thing, because being forced to consciously think about how to do things that others do automatically means you are thinking often about something profound – language – that many people think about rarely or not at all. IMO, thinking about things is what makes people wise.

 

 

I was taught, at a young age, by someone I though a good philosopher, that the most important philosophical principle is expressed in what he termed the central maxim of philosophy:

 

Seldom affirm, never deny, always distinguish.

I’ve had no experience that inclined me to doubt this.

 

The principle you’ve written here, Paul, seem to me more moral philosophical conclusions than fundamental philosophical principles. One might, and many have, argued that applied moral philosophy is more important than general philosophy, but usually that argument is intended to apply to people in general, not philosophers as a class.

 

As a matter of formal terminology, “theology” means literally the study of a necessarily single supreme being who created and sustains the universe, so is, I think, too narrow a term for what you intend. Likewise, “spiritual”, though it lacks as well-defined a consensus meaning as “theology”, had a lot of supernatural baggage.

 

I recommend you reconsider whether what you mean in your last-listed principle above is inherently related to the theos (God), spirits, and the supernatural, or rather related only to the morality branch of philosophy – in short, the question of how to define and distinguish right and wrong.

 

I’ve a personal stake in this distinction, as I’m an atheist – one who thinks God does not exist other than as a fictional character and concept – and a bright – one who does not believes that everything real is natural, none of it supernatural. As such, I think that people who believe in gods or the supernatural are fundamentally wrong.

 

 

The plethora of catagories and meanings in philosophy are our friends. They help us distinguish.

[pljames]

Craig,

I tend to go overboard philosophying moral philosophy. I need more patients in that area. I also go overboard judging philosophy. There seems to be to much criticism from me on how people understand the way they understand what they have read. I tend to try to see the big picture and morphe it into my way understanding it. I love philosophy and psychology, but need to be aware of social knowledge as personal knowledge instead of social knowledge. I want to take what I like from social philosophy and make it my personal philosophy (which I am beginning to believe is wrong).

 

I have to understand my way. Is that wrong? I see a tree and understand it's a tree understanding you might see the tree, but differently from what I see. Do I have a problem with understanding my way as opposed as how others understand there way? And if I do how do I correct it? Paul

Edited February 27, 2013 by pljames

[ErlyRisa]

Craig,

I tend to go overboard philosophying moral philosophy. I need more patients in that area. I also go overboard judging philosophy. There seems to be to much criticism from me on how people understand the way they understand what they have read. I tend to try to see the big picture and morphe it into my way understanding it. I love philosophy and psychology, but need to be aware of social knowledge as personal knowledge instead of social knowledge. I want to take what I like from social philosophy and make it my personal philosophy (which I am beginning to believe is wrong).

 

I have to understand my way. Is that wrong? I see a tree and understand it's a tree understanding you might see the tree, but differently from what I see. Do I have a problem with understanding my way as opposed as how others understand there way? And if I do how do I correct it? Paul

 

 

Yep: its problematic.

 

Some of us start to think -- sooo much - we just kill ourselves.

Edited March 25, 2014 by ErlyRisa

[pljames]

That you “can’t understand verbs and nouns” seems an overly broad and far-fetched a diagnosis, Paul.

 

Can you understand written and spoken English (and any other languages you know)? Can you speak quickly, and with reasonably correct grammer?

 

If you can do these, but have difficulty writing, you’re suffering from what can very broadly be categorized under dyslexia, as opposed to a more severe and pervasive disorder that would be categorized under aphasia.

You are correct I have both delexia and aphasia, and I do not know if I can overcome them. Paul

 

A disorder like you have is not necessarily a bad thing, because being forced to consciously think about how to do things that others do automatically means you are thinking often about something profound – language – that many people think about rarely or not at all. IMO, thinking about things is what makes people wise.

 

 

I was taught, at a young age, by someone I though a good philosopher, that the most important philosophical principle is expressed in what he termed the central maxim of philosophy:

 

Seldom affirm, never deny, always distinguish.

I’ve had no experience that inclined me to doubt this.

 

The principle you’ve written here, Paul, seem to me more moral philosophical conclusions than fundamental philosophical principles. One might, and many have, argued that applied moral philosophy is more important than general philosophy, but usually that argument is intended to apply to people in general, not philosophers as a class.

 

As a matter of formal terminology, “theology” means literally the study of a necessarily single supreme being who created and sustains the universe, so is, I think, too narrow a term for what you intend. Likewise, “spiritual”, though it lacks as well-defined a consensus meaning as “theology”, had a lot of supernatural baggage.

 

I recommend you reconsider whether what you mean in your last-listed principle above is inherently related to the theos (God), spirits, and the supernatural, or rather related only to the morality branch of philosophy – in short, the question of how to define and distinguish right and wrong.

 

I’ve a personal stake in this distinction, as I’m an atheist – one who thinks God does not exist other than as a fictional character and concept – and a bright – one who does not believes that everything real is natural, none of it supernatural. As such, I think that people who believe in gods or the supernatural are fundamentally wrong.

 

 

The plethora of catagories and meanings in philosophy are our friends. They help us distinguish.

 

 

 

[pljames]

You are correct I have both delexia and aphasia, and I do not know if I can overcome them. Paul

[Alex358]

I don't think it is simply a matter of overcoming them, but perhaps managing them. Have you been to specialists and therapists who can work with you and these issues? I would also suggest that there are people who let themselves be driven crazy with all the questions in the Universe ( I might be one of them...), so then the underlying question becomes, "How do I find peace?"...