臉書有一種One Liner的格式，它提供具有不同色彩的背景及較大的字符但限定隻許有130個字符（包括空格），而如果不使用這種格式，除非你自己專門製作圖片，隻能用很小的字符來顯示。這樣一來如何使用臉書的One Liner格式便成為在臉書上有效傳遞信息的重要手段。但另一方麵，雖然在臉書上用One Liner發帖有字數限定，但是又有兩種方式可以對有限的字數造成的局限進行彌補，一是在發出的帖子下麵以評論的方式加說明（如同博客一樣），另一是在將帖子進行轉發時可以在One Liner的上方加注說明。但是，不論是在帖子下麵還是上麵加說明都隻能用小字符，因此既然選擇了用One Liner，那麽雖然說明的字數可以超過One Liner的內容字數，卻一般也不會寫太長，否則就沒意義了。
我貼One Liner的主要目的是在貼出後轉發到個哲學群組中，在轉發時也會因不同的需要在One Liner帖子的上方加注一些說明，我這裏就不專門用不同的字體將One Liner的內容與相應的加注說明區分開，而是把它們混在一起。除此之外，我偶爾也會專門用大字符製作一些比One Liner長的圖片來貼稍微長一些的內容（也長不了太多），這裏我也把那些的圖片中的文字內容匯編進來。
3H's of human trustworthiness:
1 Heart: goodwill
2 Head: mental competence
3 Hand: personal&social readiness, more complicated than 1&2
Since the ancient times, the authoritative body of the society would always promote certain styles of writing to make whoever follow them feel prestigious and noble, and easy for whoever familiar with them to comprehend as well. Nowadays professional publishing bodies for philosophy are no exception to this.
However, the practice of promoting authors to write in preferred conventional formats could easily lead philosophical discussions into a negative fashion of pursuing beautiful presentations with frivolous wording but stereotyped ways of thinking, or reduce philosophy into an empirical discipline; either way, it would be a lethal dose to philosophy as a discipline, especially for young college students…
Sadly for the mankind that people often either need to support the bad in the battle against the worse and feel being just or appreciate the existence of the bad for its contrast to the worse. In fact, one bad could help another bad by attracting the focus of criticism. Criticisms against bad things in cultural tradition or faith-based teachings could often be used as excuses for doing some other bad things because of the naturally partial linguistic focuses in the original criticisms...
This is how the worse supports the bad: the former makes the latter look good or even just...
Short-sightedness, or myopia, is a very common eye condition that causes distant objects to appear blurred, while close objects can be seen clearly.
Myopia of intelligence leads to ignorance of the harm of the crippled philosophy; the latter makes the former further worsened...
In politics, people need to select sides; but in philosophy, one should always be prepared to be in solitude with own positions
In response to the confusion of some in this group about "over-dependence upon science", this post gives one symptom...
A modern disease: loving long demos of wrong conclusions at a big $ cost over correct conclusions form philosophical insights
Did Socrates consider himself a philosopher?
Yes, of course!
He even used that as the reason why death was good for him!
Some Professional Philosophers (P.P.) are telling us the following:
1) The most important quality of a P.P. is the intelligibility of writing;
2) There is no truth since everything is relative. A 6 can also be read as 9 at the opposite position.
Now the question is: Since good high school students can be very intelligible and can give anyone their positions clearly, why do we need P.P. anymore?
If ordinary people do not understand what professional philosophers are saying, that is understandable; but if professional philosophers are NOT able to understand what others are saying, we are just wasting all the social resource to maintain such a profession!
The current tragedy is that professional philosophers are only understand simple contents that are put in the style they have been familiar with! Accordingly, now it has become that the only people that read the work of professional philosophers are other professional philosophers, which is completely disconnected from the development of human civilization, and disconnected from the life of world!
When looking forward on a curve, one would look straight along the tangent, but the real line will turn as it is meant to be....
While the 7 dimensions might never be part of the empirical of 4-dimensional creatures for they are just beyond our reach, are you still calling physicists as scientists or hypocritically making them exceptions but continuing with your empirical science versus speculative metaphysics feud?
This does not mean that we might never enter the extra dimensions by any means...but before that happens, the whole issue would be purely metaphysical, and after that happens, it would be an example of how metaphysics could lead science again...
Utterly Empirical Science vs Utterly Speculative Metaphysics? Face this: the 7-d's might never be part of the empirical of 4-d's.
The ultimate significance of economy is how to harness resources to make changes to life through circulation, for good or for bad
In the past decades, we have often learnt from the news some tragic stories of building collapses around the world either because of the shoddy work and use of inferior material for the original foundations, or because the owners of the buildings illegally added more floors to the buildings...
Unfortunately, that kind of sad news has not served as a warning to the world about the foundation of its civilization (i.e. the mainstream philosophy), which has been entrusted to the corresponding academia bearing its title...
Nonetheless, humans being aware or not, the edifice would collapse when the load exceeds the bearing capacity of the foundation...
When adding more floors to the edifice, its bearing capacity of philosophical foundation has been of little concern to the world..
Simulating life, especially simulating the generally unknown but critically important consequences of scientific advancement, is a very meaningful functionality of fiction writing, especially science fiction writing, which unfortunately is seldom appreciated by very few writers, and the situation is getting worse as the publishing industry pushes the writers to pursue the frenzy enthusiasm of entertaining effects...
Science fiction is handy but potent in demonstrating the logical entailment of scientific advances by entertaining the audience..
With BCI technology, scientists opened a Pandora's Box for those they are trying to define as evil, but won't be able to close it
Bad philosophy of life might seem no harm to individuals, but will harm everyone's life indirectly by ruining the whole society...
The moment one holds untruth over truth to please the power or his own vanity, he is doing nothing but eroding our civilization...
Defaming metaphysics and renaming "Metaphysical Understandings" to "Physical Meanings" would not get rid of metaphysical notions from physics...A complete divorce of physics from metaphysics is simply impossible, no matter how much hard the academia has tried and will try....
Without metaphysical terms:
Time, Space, Matter, Form, Force, Potency, Quantity, Quality, Element ......
Is there still physics?
It's typical of hypocrites by claiming loving philosophy or being philosophers while obsessed in the "hardness" of physics!!!
Unfortunately, imagination cannot replace hard reading, even with the psychedelic pill offered by the academia...
Simple but detailed knowledge of all philosophy is an imaginary illusion, which many are indulging with in social media......
Although originally "meta" means after in Greek, it has become far beyond...
Metaphysics is above Physics, not opposite to Physics; the former exists in the latter, and the latter follows the former..
It surprised me that so many started to attack metaphysics without knowing what metaphysics is...Particularly, it seems that some philosophy professionals have trouble about why I say metaphysics exists in physics...THIS IS THE ANSWER: all things in physics are beings, and being qua being (i.e. being as such) exists in all beings!!!
Metaphysics is about Being qua Being, or in plain English Being as Such...so all beings have something belonging to metaphysics...
Why the academia cannot face the reality of collectively low capacity of reading comprehension? Even no journal is dealing with it
Professional philosophers, like other professionals, are the most potent hindrance to the advance of their own profession...
A contest of BN $ prize for winner of what's considered as alien can help to solve CropCircle myth, if a generous rich man helps..
Historic artifacts are too often used as a power resort to trash classic texts when professional philosophers failed to grasp them
Humans could lie in many ways, or disguise in many ways, but NONE could cheat with the philosophy that they don’t understand...
The decline of the academic philosophy starts with the capacity of reading comprehension and honesty
Philosophy is the easiest academic place to look great, but the most difficult academic place to be great
A comparison between science, math, and philosophy
Three scholars had a chat about the difficulties of their professions. One of them was a philosopher, another mathematician, and another scientist. Please find out the profession of each one based on the following story.
A: It’s tough to do my job because I have to read so many stuffs to catch up with everything.
B: That sounds not bad. Reading your stuff is fun and enjoyable. Most of my readings are so boring and tough.
C: At least you guys all know what you read, which would be a luxury for me.
A, B: What do you mean?
C: I mean, you could understand all the papers you read; or at least all papers would be understandable to someone in your fields.
A, B: So?
C: It’s common in my field for something not truly understood by anyone for decades, or centuries, or even millenniums.
A, B: Why?
C: Instead of written with unequivocally definite information as your papers, we are dealing with the truth behind the veil of fuzzy natural languages.
It has been commonly accepted by many philosophy academics that "difficulty", "impossible to understand" are also part of their hermeneutical interpretation of classic text...More than 10 years ago, when I started to talk about the interpretation of Tao Te Ching, I was told by many that Tao Te Ching is not supposed to be interpreted in plain language, we should only sense its implication...I have proved them wrong....Now when I started to share my analysis on Hegel, some professionally trained philosophy academics come again to say that Hegel is not supposed to be understood...
How to distinguish good Hermeneutics from the fig leaf for covering the incapability of immediate comprehension?
Can wisdom survive without truth?
Or is philosophy only for gaining wisdom without the need for truth?
Formal education in philosophy = knowing philosophy?
If so, why philosophy is dead? Not enough have got education in philosophy?
If after some famous people made some mistakes, the whole academia follows for decades, who is more wrong?