 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (1)ijonspeches ...and 144 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614224 Today 6 Topics 127549 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I've been reading and discussing Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics, and have been perplexed by this question of cause and effect in regards to everyday "normal" actions and thier purpose. When asked if people do anything knowingly that serves them no purpose, i respond that 'some' people watch tv with no purpose in mind other than to watch tv. the professer that i am argueing with says that so long as they know that they are watching tv, then that is there purpose even if it is not constructive. My response is along these lines...if some knows that by watching tv they are putting something of which in the long run is benificial, i.e studing, work etc... how can this be considered a true purpose if purpose is the same as a goal, and if a goal is the ultimate good in aristotle's teleological view of life? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
In other words, "Kill Your TV"? ;) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that is kind of off the subject, but yeah tv is destructive to the individual and their needs to grown, create, and live fully. i wouldn't kill my tv, if i had one but maybe i would use it as an aquarium... anyways, what of purpose. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
for the most part...watching tv serves no purpose, its just done to avoid doing other things. most people watch tv because they think they need to or because everyone watches it(im generalizing, Im not talking of a certain person). is every choice made by a person done with reason or purpose? probably not, I wonder how often people actually think that, "ok im going in here and getting this done so I can fulfill blablabla" or if things are just done "because" I dont know if im going anywhere with this but oh well. this is an interesting topic you bring up though, I wish there were more of these on this board with questions like these. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
REMEMBER: its National TV TURNOFF WEEK until the 27th of April. this doesnt apply to me because for the most part i have annual tv turnoff if you catch my drift. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I almost always watch TV with a purpose in mind. The purpose being to watch something specific. ie, to actually tune in for a program. Saying watching TV to avoid doing other things is still watching TV with a purpose. The purpose being to avoid anything else. But there are times when I have been sat in front of the TV and wanted to get up and do something else, but honestly can't be bothered. I have no reason or need to sit in front of it - I even want to move, but I sit there anyway. So I agree with ifkardo I guess, provided the circumstances fit. *looks around to see if anyone's watching* |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
can/do people do anything knowingly that serves them no purpose? haven't read nichomachean ethics, but i'd say there's several places you could go with this. hume's critique of cause & effect. um .. in what sense does aristotle define "knowingly" ... or seeing aristotle is a virtue ethicist - in what sense does he view "purpose? obviously it isn't being constructive ... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
And if BBC2 was still showing Buffy like they're supposed to be, that would be a problem. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
for the most part...watching tv serves no purpose, its just done to avoid doing other things that's its purpose then isn't it - to avoid doing other things? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Watching TV to put off something that in the long run is more beneficial could be considered procrastination, and someone could consider procrastinating a purpose, couldn't they? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
but isn't avoiding what you HAVE to do a purpose on its own, a goal? I think both avoiding and doing what you have to do are goals. the one is geared to direct satisfaction (NOT doing something you don't want to do) and the other to satisfaction within a greater scheme, in this case a larger scale in time. you could also argue that doing things you do not really want to do, i.e. doing things for school, are not goals, simply because you HAVE to do them. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
nicho. is meant to be similar in some ways to nietzsche's "virtue" ethics innit. so in the extreme existentialist sense i guess everything you do has purpose, and thats the existential weight on you - exemplified in the doctrine of eternal recurrence. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
:) ok fine. I didnt mean that people just somehow unknowingly stumble into watching tv,for the most part of course they go into watching it with the purpose of watching a certain program. what im saying is that it isnt beneficial in the longrun. (sure it might be enjoyable at the time) But I consider it a waste of time to just look at programs that usually have no worthwhile or meaningful(this of course depends on what one considers meaningful, but I think most people can agree that most of the things on tv are trash with no message at all) reason for wanting to watch them. did that make sense? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
its all up to Aristotle's definition of purpose i guess, and contradicting that - what about "existing" - presumably you can know this, but the meaning of Being remains obscured (throwing in some Heidegger here) - |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
but then you rate what has to be done in meaningfulness whether it is purposeful or not.. so what if the thing you have to for (for example) school is just a bunch of stupid exercises in a field you already master quite fully.. what if you still watch television to avoid this pointless task..? which is more important and therefore has more purpose? in the longrun, the second one. in the shortrun, the first one. why is the longrun more important? does it all have to focus on development, or more on happiness/pleasure? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
existentially, i agree, however i am dealing with for the most part my professer's values or belief, which is fine in as much as i can express my beliefs, (which or course, she is more than willing to listen to) but the question remains, no matter if one is procarstinting or simply vegitating in front of the tv, if that purpose or goal has no 'good' in it, i.e. the 'ultimate good.' then it is not a true purpose. i know that this seems logically absurd, but aristotle wrote and taught in this manner, therefore it is the only way to understand it logiclly, wait... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
was aristotle a dualist? does he have any notion of intentionality? couldn't his ethics be seen as a guideline to your purposeful actions. ie. that an action is purposeful is necessary but not a sufficient condition for it being good. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ok, you outdid me again. I agree with that, I see no value in doing work you already know how to do and can master easily. good point on the importance of the short run as well. but instead of watching tv as an easy way of avoiding things(which again is NOT a bad thing) one could do countless other things instead. well I cant really argue my point exactly and cant seem to put my thoughts into words right now. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
seems like you're trying to make the good and purpose coincide, i'm sure there's a way to do it. aristotle was an essentialist eh? you could do some zeno on him :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
if purpose is to be understood in the existential sense, then "purpose" loses all meaning - namely, if all actions we do are purposeful, the term 'purposeful' loses its meaning, unless of course Aristotle is claiming purpose to be an existential/Being .. in which case it could get a bit more tricky. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hmmm, philosophy... I will avoid this thread!! :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
indeed, this has gotten kind of sticky!!! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"..namely, if all actions we do are purposeful, the term 'purposeful' loses its meaning.." true. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
agreed!!! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"but instead of watching tv as an easy way of avoiding things(which again is NOT a bad thing) one could do countless other things instead." this is true of all possible actions. the question remains why the one thing has more "worth" than the other? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
IF purpose is to be understood as a kind of quasi-ontological structure, you could argue that the term 'purpose' is used illegitimately, and thus one ought to be able to distinguish purpose from non-purpose. thus in that sense you could identify purpose with good - which seems to be what you were getting at ...? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
umm, let me add one thing not watching tv does not have more "value" than watchin tv imo, it is just an example that i choose because it seems to be a universal activity, which we do or know of. another thing, when i say that watching tv has no purpose, i mean that when "some" person turns on the tv by DEFAULT then, there is no purpose, cause it is like a reflex. we can all agree on this, no? if so, then this shall be the example that i would like to use. btw, i had no clue that it was turn off the tv week. i know of it existance only, like national no shopping day and stuff. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
TV is okay and non-harmless as long as you understand it's all done with one purpose: to wash your brains and to make you do what they want you to do. (the next stage is putting tinfoil around your head) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
this korben, is very, very helpful... agreed!!! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"i mean that when "some" person turns on the tv by DEFAULT then, there is no purpose, cause it is like a reflex." default? i see what you mean - but i always find that if you argue using their terms, ie. use their model, and explore it ... you will end up finding either circularity, infinite regress or self-referential inconsistency : in some shape or form. ie. is there a way where such default action can be interpreted as non-purposeful in aristotle's terms? if not, then your argument runs the risk of reaching a agree to disagree conclusion? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
existentially, there is no purpose people do what they do to survive, which includes watching tv. of COURSE is has a purpose |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
fuck, it seems that this has happened then doesn't it? aristotle doesn't allow for this "non-purposeful" mode of thinking. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
usually,the purpose of watching tv is for sheer entertainment, or one could watch a documentary or news program, in which case the purpose would be to get informed, which could also be viewed as a form of entertainment. Both these purposes are true purposes, even though it may seem that the activity is a useless one. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i've got to dash off ... but IF aristotle doesn't allow non-purposeful action then you could point out that there's a problem for 'purpose' to be considered meaningful at all. see [#00665431] below. a bit of semiotics .. de Sassure if anything it seems this "purposefulness of action" (sort of along french existentialist lines) only serves to hold people responsible for their actions. thus as long as you 'know' that your acting, you can be held responsible. perhaps this is what non-purposeful action is .. action that is not 'known' by the subject. sort vaguely reminiscent of Kant's transcendental argument for morality. (morality exists, condition of posibility for morality is free will) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
thankyou for expanding on what i was thinking :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
make that transcendental argument for free will. au revoir |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
thank you kind gentle people, thank you VERY much |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
What the fuck is wrong with you people. Heh. No, seriously, have you ever had sex? Hehhehehehheehee. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
woah!!! didn't see that one coming,,, um yeah, just to prove a small insignificant, meaningless pint, i have lots of sex, with might i add a very beatiful young women. nice body, face, good breath, intelligent, very kinky, so there... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I hope her name isn't Aristotle. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
