Cory Banta

Lexington, KY, United States

About Cory

I'm passionate about

Education Theory, Philosophy of Education, Philosophy, Sexology, Philosophy of Sex, Sexual Ethics, Aesthetics

Comments & conversations

Noface
Cory Banta
Posted over 3 years ago
Philosophers should replace politicians as the primary decision makers of the world.
Look back at when I was talking about guilt and its elimination. "Hmmm... defining what makes someone a philosopher or not is very tricky, at least in its most classical definition. This is not what I'm debating here. Yes, I am labeling one side of a black-and-white spectrum as a philosopher, in order to meet the context of this argument. I don't think one can define a philosopher without context: language is all subjective and whatnot--it needs to have some sort of stated relevance before something can just be defined. But my relevance and context for a philosopher is basically originating from how one deals with guilt. Do they distinguish it with emotion, feeling, and then move on without its ethical contemplation? Or do they distinguish it with passion, thought, consider its large scale implications, and arrange their worldview accordingly?" There is my definition of a philosopher. I do not believe in any government, or in any lack of it, necessarily. Each government or lack of government must be in relation to some sort of objective. Even then, these objectives are transient. What I want the government to move towards right now is not what I may want it to do in different situations or in the future. There is no one perfect government. This being said, I think society should move towards making every citizen as virtuous and philosophical as possible.
Noface
Cory Banta
Posted over 3 years ago
Philosophers should replace politicians as the primary decision makers of the world.
Let me address the latter part of your argument. First off, I think you are presenting a very good point here. I admit that. Because if this were to happen the current state of people would not allow that, i.e., the philosopher king has to be in constant service to the ignorant people he rules over, the true philosopher king society is not realized until everyone is equally a philosopher, and therefore we don't need rulers to begin with. The system, therefore, is dynamic, and growing, and exponential. It IS, however, unlike the current system, not static, and therefore I would argue automatically an improvement. You bring up a very good point about defining virtue, which is a trap I have read too much about to comfortably go into. But perhaps we can just say, in context to this theoretically society, people who place idealism above practical and material value? And yes, I think that is a decent definition of a philosopher, though I really equate my definition of virtue to be synonymous with philosopher in these contexts. Another valid point is that the philosopher in power may not think he's the best one suited for the job. Perhaps he has a protegee or has learned of a young student recently out of the amazing education system we would theoretically enjoy. Or just some other old coot who he thinks could do a decent job. Most philosophers, given their personalities, would probably tire after serving too long. They want to pass it on!
Noface
Cory Banta
Posted over 3 years ago
Philosophers should replace politicians as the primary decision makers of the world.
Yes, there would still be some form of mechanization here. I'm also glad you caught that part about Pirsig vs. Chomsky. Very astute. And a very good point. But can you imagine the type of debate that would ensue? The media would have a very difficult time sensationalizing it. The masses would have to adapt. Philosophical people just make better decisions, on average. And in theory this would lead to a more philosophical populace.
Noface
Cory Banta
Posted over 3 years ago
Philosophers should replace politicians as the primary decision makers of the world.
You are very correct. We have to, therefore, turn everyone into a philosopher, an intellectual, a poet, an artist. Now, this would in theory be achieved with education, but the way I see it the bureaucracy, the culture, and the government combined have created a vicious cycle that inhibits any true education reformation. The only possible good I can see in changing the entire cultural format is to take advantage of the poor system (the top-down system) by replacing its leaders with philosophers, therefore being able to reform education, and therefore the people as well.