Stanisław Lem - Forum

English => Forum in English => Wątek zaczęty przez: Clapaucius w Październik 20, 2004, 02:43:55 pm

Tytuł: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Clapaucius w Październik 20, 2004, 02:43:55 pm
I read and study St. Lem  for almost 25 years. And It is interesting for me to collect or,  if to be more exact,  to define the main Lem's philosofical problems, lines and ideas.
Here they are:
1) Intellect and personality.
The main Lem's problem, which is passes in different variations through almost every Lem's book like a red line.
a)What is "another intellect"?
Is it possible or it is a mental experiment only?
What can be a kind or degree of "anotherness"?
Can it be understood?
Can it be descripted?
What is higher intellect?
If it has some common basis with human mind, can we descript somehow or, at least, imagine any mind structure, which cannot be never understood  by
humans?

2) What is personality?
Can any person be copied and retronslated
Is nonhuman personality possible, and can we
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Clapaucius w Październik 20, 2004, 03:19:58 pm
sorry, I continue.

b) Personality and autodescription.
What is personality?
Can any person be copied or retronslated?
Will be the retronslated or copied person a same or the same person (sorry if I define it not clear enough, it is slightly difficult for me to say it in english).
Is nonhuman personality possible, and if it is possible and have completely strange internal structure can we descript it in our human sence as a personality?

This is some sort of Kantial problem;
Lem interpretate the theme the-thing-in-itself (can I say it right?) in a mental way.
The problem can be understood also  as a problem of God description.

2) The nature and the philosophy of chance.
Lem is a probabilist, he views the world as a combination of probabilities and think that  one of the main problems in human mentality is a belief in purpose and sence of every accidental thing.  But there are only statistics and probabilities.

3) Fantomatics -- Virtaul reality.
Can a hole and complete world be produced or reproduced artifitially;
can a person be closed to this virtual world  
and can he distinguish highly detailized virtual world from the real one and to find a mental way out?
And here we can correlate this problem to the theme of "another mind" -- can we find the way out of our preset mind?

that's all for now.

Who would like to continue?

Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: skrzat w Październik 20, 2004, 06:27:59 pm
Cytuj
Who would like to continue?



yes, please!
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Socrates w Październik 20, 2004, 07:03:33 pm
I command you to continue as well.
Cheers, Socrates
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Październik 21, 2004, 03:01:56 am
Well, since You're poining everything out right :) there's no reason to argue with you in any way.
So continue please, we'll see what else you've discovered:]

btw. I'm impressed that you read Lem for 25 yrs now, since I'm 25 myself :). Greatest respect to You:)
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Karel w Październik 21, 2004, 08:03:26 am
I have never read sci-fi, but always thought about future of mankind. Ihave never been interested in philosophy, but always thought about life. Then I´ve found memories in a bathtub.

good job, Clapaucius
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Clapaucius w Październik 22, 2004, 12:40:02 pm
So, if you want me to continue, I'll continue, despite of my poor english.

Some additions to the paragraph, which I've defined as
"Personality and autodescription".

Hary's transformation from "nobody", "noone man" into the "complete person" who realize, "autodescript" herself as a person  is quite interesting mental and literatural experiment.  Noperson converts to person, but when? Where is the point, the "quantum leap" of this transformation? Or is it exists at all, and the process is slooth-continious? And how the person itself sees it?  A very interesting psycological aspect. It was tracked in quite close way in one of my favorite american novels -- Daniel Keyes's "Flowers for Algernon".  It is interesting, that both of them -- Lem and Keis -- have academical degree in psycology (if to be more exact, Lem has one in psyciatric).  The difference between Keyes's and Lem's versions are, that Lem has more kosmopsycolgistic, universalistic view, but Keyes is more psycologistic, as it "sees" a process from inside and also tracks a contaverse process.

Another line in Lem's creativity.  A religion. Lem define himself as an atheist. But he returns to the religious and nearly-religious problems so persistently, that you can't doubt, how interesting this theme  for Lem is.
His books contain a lot of critics of orthodaxal, official religions, mainly the critics of Catholic concepts.  He even presents his own religious (or pseudoreligious) concept, which is scattered in its parts throw many Lem's books from "Cyberiade" and "Star Diaries" to "His Master's Voice" and "Eyewitness Account".  His (or his character's) religious conception is closed to european religiosophistic construction known as "Philosopher's God".  I will not state or retell Lem's concepts, it will take a lot of space and a lot of difficulties to me, because of my poor english. Everyone who cares can find and analize them himself by reading Lem's books.
I will let myself only a little critic notes, that is very delicate theme, so I beg your pardon from everybody, who can be offended by me.  
When Lem mentions critisizes some concepts of orthodoxal religions, he is to concentrated on catholicism and shows an annoying ignorance of jewish religious and philosophical concepts, and this is especially regrettable, because Lem's ancesstors, as he mentioned in one of his books, were jews.  Why it is regrettable? Because many contradictions of christian philosophy are sucsessfully solved in jewish classic and kabbalistic  philosophy, and almost every lapse in Christian Holy Bible, on which Lem directs his criticism, is based on incorrect translation from hebrew.  The great argentinian writer -- Chorche Luis Borches (who is one of the writers, the most respectable by Lem, and one who influents on Lem a lot) is not jewish, but knows a lot about kabbalah and jewish philosophy.
I beg your pardon again.
That's all for today.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Clapaucius w Październik 22, 2004, 12:42:07 pm
>>btw. I'm impressed that you read Lem for 25 yrs now, since I'm 25 myself . Greatest respect to You

BTW.  I discover Lem to myself when I was 10. Now I'm 35 y.o.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Socrates w Październik 26, 2004, 03:46:12 am
Wow Terminus,
I'm impressed that you're 25; I'm only 22 myself.  But I've been reading Lem since I was 8.  (sorry, just wanted to throw some numbers around; sometimes numbers are needed to keep one grounded).
Cheers, Socrates
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Karel w Październik 27, 2004, 03:59:34 pm
Why apologize? I think it is good to know something about others; 23 years, almost 2 years of intensive Lem reading. Someone else?
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: SoGo w Listopad 25, 2004, 02:37:30 pm
Good Day, Gents.
Clapaucius, a very interesting Analysis.
In a line with your, I am just a young guy, only 17 years old. But my first book from lem I got with seven.
(Solaris, the old one from the Volk und Welt Verlag, I am living in Germany)
In the last two years I tried to get all his books.
Not so easy, if you take a closer look on his works, you can see how many he has written.
And every novel a genius work.

But to your question, an interpretation of the lem's view for religion:

In dialogues he has written, that every thing is full of an energy. There was the question of your personal identity ( if I made a copy from you, is those you?)
There he had written that it wouldn't be the same, if the person, you had copied, lifed already.
Only by the way, here comes my interpretation:
The energy, everyone is flowed with, is (in christian name) our soul.
But I prefer the name "Karma", because our soul isn't going anywere.
There aren't any paradise or hell, just only the galaxis, the big nothing.
And Karma is flowing through the universe, (what it is I cant say, maybe we could analyze it one day)
and it fills everything who exist. Of course, a stone hasn't got as much Karma as a plant, a plant not as much as a cow for example, and a cow hasn't got as much as we. The mass of the energy is the grade of your conciousness. Ok, perhaps it sounds grude, if I say the stone can feel anything and has his own feelings.
I wouldn't go so far, but I would say, the stone isn't completely dead, that means has no energy, but thats not right.
So Karma is everywere, all around an in us.

Next thing: The question of God









God is Karma
Karma is God
We are God



Maybe Karma can think
Maybe Karma can doing things, knows everything
Maybe is has made us for a sense only it knows
But thats not the matter, I only gave the object a name.

What are you thinking now?
Please tell me, I would be interesting in, because thats the theory I believe.

Till later, guys
My Respect for your Intellect

Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Listopad 27, 2004, 03:39:48 am
Cytuj

God is Karma
Karma is God
We are God



In a way, Your karma theory is a religious system, similar to buddism.



It is, in fact, buddism. It is not fortunate to call buddism a religion,

as it doesn't include certain dogmats (like God).

Your theory differs from buddism, becouse buddists don't trouble

theirselves with the question of God. You have to admit yourself, that

IF God is Karma, Karma is God, We are God, THEN ,,we are Karma" tells us

as much as ,,we are God''. So God becomes just another name for

,,Karma'' and as it is so, it is just unnecesary to use the word God.

But on the other hand, if ,,Karma is God'' than we can as well forget

about Karma and consider only God.
You said for yourself, that ''We are karma" and that some ,,part'' (or

quantity) of Karma dwells within everyone of us.
That's brilliant, but consider this. Everyone who prefers the word

,,God'' to word ,,Karma'' will tell You, that God is everything, and in

every being and thing ther is something godlike. In a human it is a

soul, because a soul (as western religions consider it) is a part of God

that lives in every human.
So you see, that telling ,,karma is in us'' is as good as ,,God is in

us,  as our soul''.
There is of course the truth, that both this statements are beatiful and

both can be believed in. But the don't differ that much.

I have no doubt that as a German person you were raised among the

Christians, and this is the cause you are talking about ,,God'' and

,,soul''. Someone who lives in, for example, in Tibet, may never have heard a word ,,God'' before but is thinking just the same as You.
That is also a beatifull thing.

There is also a sort of misticism  in Your system. You think that Universe is empty (phisically) filled only with Karma (need I remind the words of the christian Bible: The universe was empty, and the spirit of god was filling it... (or similar)). And You admit that You don't understand the Universe: You hope it will sometimes be known what it is.
And so do the worshippers of many religions. The claim that ,,God is a great unknown'' (Chrisitians) or that the ,,human is unknown for God'' (Muslims) or that the world cannot be fully explained - and there is no need for it to be explained :)

After all, I want to salute You, and send You congratulations for being so intelectually/religiously active at the age of 17.

I will just add: the religious systems are very similar. Isomorphic, it could be said.

Cheers
...



Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: wetal w Listopad 29, 2004, 01:01:07 pm
I `m fond of SF and it is no wonder that Stanislaw Lem is one of my favourite writers.Cyberiad  I consider to be one of the greatest Lem`s works.Author`s special sense of humour,cyber/fairy-tales,very phylosophical ones - is what you can find in this book.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Jerzyab w Grudzień 01, 2004, 05:49:03 pm
Hi Clapaucius, hi all...

I agree with the philosophical problems you see in Lem, but I think it all boils down to one thing: futurology. And futurology IN philosophy. I mean, he actually and intentionally (?) predicted many of the issues that are now hot topics in philosophy. To give two examples, Golem XIV talks about selfish genes three years before Dawkins did, and the questions about mind and personality follow Wittgenstein's legacy, extending to the Dennett-Searle debate...

See ya! ;)
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Grudzień 03, 2004, 01:46:36 am
Cytuj

I agree with the philosophical problems you see in Lem, but I think it all boils down to one thing: futurology. And futurology IN philosophy. I mean, he actually and intentionally (?) predicted many of the issues that are now hot topics in philosophy.

See ya! ;)


It is true that Lem predicted some trends that emerged later. But does that enable You to think that this   all comes down to futurology ?
What does this sentence mean, anyway?

I see you're brilliant and have figured that Golem speaks the word Wittgenstein repeated later, but does this mean that Lem is a futurologist and nothing more?

I say, he's not only about guessing what will happen. He also gives clues about what already happened. For example, ,,Mortal Engines'' and ,,Cyberiad" contain metaphorical figures that depict totalitarism, as it was in Poland or Czechoslovakia in 1945-89's.

So it doesn't  all ,,boil down '' to futurology.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Jerzyab w Grudzień 04, 2004, 02:33:56 pm
Well, I didn't mean to be reductionist, I only wanted to show that the central problem in Lem's philosophy is futurology, even if it means futurology of the past (like in the two examples of totalitarism you quoted). In this sense, I believe Lem is pretty close to Popper (whose philosophy of history Lem acknowledges in his introduction to Summa).

Nor do I think all that Lem does are predictions of the future. I never said that I don't consider him as a philosopher (and a much underrated one). Like Nietzsche, Lem uses stories as vehicles for his philosophy, but, personally, I believe he does it in a much more succesful way than Nietzsche.

If Lem is a philosopher, he is a philosopher of science. In "His Master's Voice", the traditional problems in Philosophy of Science are dealt with in an elegant way, underlined by Lem's ironical style. For "traditional problems", I understand: How is knowledge acquired? What is randomness? What is utility of knowledge (if any)?

Those questions are of special interest to me since I am currently on a Master's in Philosophy of Science.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: SoGo w Grudzień 12, 2004, 03:41:39 pm
Hmm, interesting interpretation Jerzyab.
Masters Voice tell me that it is impossible an unthinkable
to have contact with something what can communicate and is not from our world.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Grudzień 13, 2004, 12:33:32 am
Cytuj
Nor do I think all that Lem does are predictions of the future. I never said that I don't consider him as a philosopher (and a much underrated one). Like Nietzsche, Lem uses stories as vehicles for his philosophy, but, personally, I believe he does it in a much more succesful way than Nietzsche.

If Lem is a philosopher, he is a philosopher of science. In "His Master's Voice", the traditional problems in Philosophy of Science are dealt with in an elegant way, underlined by Lem's ironical style. For "traditional problems", I understand: How is knowledge acquired? What is randomness? What is utility of knowledge (if any)?

Those questions are of special interest to me since I am currently on a Master's in Philosophy of Science.


Dwóch Polaków romawiających po angielsku, no do czego to dochodzi.

Well, always a pleasure to meet a philosopher :)  
It's good  we all agree in that Lem's philosophical views are precious and worth remembering and studying.
As for randomness, he is, of what I know, pretty much ,,obsessed'' by the idea that (almost) anything can happen in a random way (as a consequence of some random process).
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Karel w Grudzień 13, 2004, 07:50:33 am
Cytuj
Dwóch Polaków romawiających po angielsku, no do czego to dochodzi.



he he he
;)
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Jerzyab w Grudzień 13, 2004, 11:09:27 pm
Cytuj
Dwóch Polaków romawiających po angielsku, no do czego to dochodzi.


(Jestem brazyliczykiem, ale mój ojciec jest polakiem.)

Cytuj
Well, always a pleasure to meet a philosopher


Well, thank you, but technically, I am not a philosopher yet, if that's possible at all... :D Nice to meet you too!

I've recently read a book about Popper's "The Misery of Historicism". As I didn't read "Summa", let me ask those of you who have: what kind of mention does Lem do to Popper? (In the introduction, I am told.)
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Grudzień 14, 2004, 03:09:52 am
Cytuj

(Jestem brazyliczykiem, ale mój ojciec jest polakiem.)



Aha, no rozumiem. Pochopnie osądziłem, że ktoś, kto tak świetnie zna polski, jest polakiem. No, mam nadzieję, że się nie obraziłeś :)

----

To make the matters clear, Jerzyab and me were talking about the fact that he speaks polish very well.  
I asked him if he is polish, but he's not. Sorry for this private conversation.

Cheers
...
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: cckeiser w Grudzień 20, 2004, 02:54:18 am
Cytuj




Well, thank you, but technically, I am not a philosopher yet, if that's possible at all... :D


A Philosophical Question!

What is a Philosopher?

Philosophy itself originated in an attempt to understand the How and the Why of all Existence.
From my pov, that is what Philosophy is. Philosophy is the search for the answers to how and why we and everything else exists.
The Greeks called it "The Love of Wisdom."
They wisely chose Wisdom over Knowledge. Any mind can acquire knowledge by simply accumulating ‘data.' It is Wisdom that requires the mind to ascertain the pertinence of that knowledge.
Any discipline we use attaining the answers to "Life, the Universe, and Everything" are all tools of Philosophy, and thus are themselves Philosophy, whether it be the Philosophy of Science, the Philosophy of Religion, or Metaphysical Philosophy. They all fall under the umbrella of Philosophy and are used to distinguish between what is truth, and what is illusion.

Thus anyone who ponders on the How and Why of Existence is by default a Philosopher.

Philosophers are born not made!
You cannot study to become a philosopher. You can study to become a more knowledgeable philosopher, or you can study to become a Philosophy Professor.

"We have an abundance of philosophy professors but no philosophers." Thoreau
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Grudzień 20, 2004, 03:38:11 am
Well... ask any question...

but the answer is still 42 :)
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: cckeiser w Grudzień 20, 2004, 06:00:41 am
Cytuj
Well... ask any question...

but the answer is still 42 :)


Yes, I know! ;D
http://userweb.nni.com/keiser/42.html
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: wetal w Grudzień 27, 2004, 01:16:01 pm
 Hi everybody ! I`ve got such a thought/ IT IS GOOD WHEN YOU ARE A PHILOSOPHER , BUT  WHAT SHOULD YOU DO IF YOU SUFFER FROM A COMPLETE LACK OF WORDS ?
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Grudzień 27, 2004, 04:18:12 pm
Not speaking at all is not pretty much worse than speaking meaningless things...
So don't be sorry
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Karel w Grudzień 27, 2004, 05:27:18 pm
In that case, wetal, you have to wait until non-verbal communication will be invented.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: cckeiser w Grudzień 29, 2004, 05:44:44 am
Cytuj
Hi everybody ! I`ve got such a thought/ IT IS GOOD WHEN YOU ARE A PHILOSOPHER , BUT  WHAT SHOULD YOU DO IF YOU SUFFER FROM A COMPLETE LACK OF WORDS ?


Paint!  :)
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Grudzień 29, 2004, 08:05:01 pm
Paint letters  ;D
Tytuł: Re: Paint!
Wiadomość wysłana przez: cckeiser w Grudzień 30, 2004, 06:04:41 am
http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/munch/
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Styczeń 03, 2005, 03:24:14 am
Well ok, Munch was talented. But still, try to paint such a message.

,,I believe, that A and B go well together, however C and D are less compatibile, newertheless C goes quite right along with A. It all means nothing by the means of THeory X, which we're all the time trying to proove. But on the contrary... ''

blabla...

Cheers...
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: cckeiser w Styczeń 05, 2005, 05:24:40 am
Cytuj
Well ok, Munch was talented. But still, try to paint such a message.

,,I believe, that A and B go well together, however C and D are less compatibile, newertheless C goes quite right along with A. It all means nothing by the means of THeory X, which we're all the time trying to proove. But on the contrary... ''

blabla...

Cheers...

Just for you Terminus!

http://brainmeta.com/forum/index.php

Enjoy!

Chuck
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Styczeń 05, 2005, 07:51:07 pm
Cytuj
http://brainmeta.com/forum/index.php


This is a huge forum this ,,brainmeta'' thing.
Could you be more specific?
Maybe You just want me to read it all through?
Ok,  I'll do it... in about five years :)

cheers
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: wetal w Styczeń 12, 2005, 12:29:28 pm
Hi everybody !It`s me again and I`ve got a news ,a kind of it, recently I have read FRANK HERBERT`s  / ANTHOUSE OF HELLSTROM/- for those who dont know who he is I remind that he`s the author of /DUNE/.So in this book it is told about people living like insekts,ants in this case,in a huge ant house.SURVIVING IS A POINT OF THEIR LIFE, THEY KNOW NO LOVE,HATE OR SORROW and follow only the instinct of self preserving. ATTENTION HERE`S A QUESTION ? HOW DO YOU THINK CAN HUMANS SURVIVE IF THEY FOLLOW THE HABITS OF INSEKTS/etwas Deutsch/ ??????????????????????????
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Styczeń 12, 2005, 05:35:55 pm
Hmm. If people behaved as insects (getting rid of their human intelect, etc.) they would actually be nothing but bigger insects. Except for the fact that their phisical constitution is different.

Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Socrates w Styczeń 13, 2005, 07:23:07 am
I believe the English version of the book is called Hellstrom's Hive.  A good book; I liked reading it, though it's not entirely mature.  Did your try "The Green Brain"?
Cheers, Socrates
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: wetal w Styczeń 22, 2005, 12:28:10 pm
Not yet,actually,it`s not an easy thing to find such a book in my town,there`s one more place left  - the library of the PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITY  I `ll see.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Styczeń 30, 2005, 01:50:58 pm
Hehe, It somehow doesn't seem like any Pedagogical University would own such book :)
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: wetal w Styczeń 31, 2005, 02:47:51 pm
He he , how clever of you, I guess every university has philological faculty so that it requires some largre library . In my case it wasn`t a problem to find here THE TIME MACHINE of Wells, almost all possible novels of Isaac Asimov/ translated into ukrainian though/, CYBERIAD OF S. LEM. But /it`s a pity/ no signs of F. Herbert.  By the way what do you think about Lem`s   /the  Eden/ ?
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Styczeń 31, 2005, 03:21:57 pm
Sorry if I offended Your University; it just seemed to me that this book we were reffering to (about ants) is not a serious lecture... But if You have so much SF in your academic library, then sorry.  Maybe that book of Herberts is better than I thought... hope you''ll find it one day.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: SoGo w Luty 03, 2005, 12:05:26 pm
Cytuj
HOW DO YOU THINK CAN HUMANS SURVIVE IF THEY FOLLOW THE HABITS OF INSEKTS/


What do you mean with etwas deutsch?
Deutsch schreiben zum Beispiel?
To your Question is must ask another question:
We live like insects with our normally intelligence, or we live like real insects (same intelligence like them) but only with our human body's?

With our Intelligence, we would burn our enviroment in the firestorm of war, just realized from Humans and Nations much smaller than us.  :)
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: wetal w Luty 06, 2005, 12:24:33 pm
The hive seems to be well organized mechanism that consists of living beings whose activities don`t harm the environment. I mean HARMONY WITH THE NATURE , humans having well organized brain and nervious system yet unable to succeed in this sphere.                                  
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Luty 07, 2005, 02:47:42 am
Humans are fully able of succeding in any spere, as well as to coexist with naturre in fully harmonic way. They just don't want to. I mean, some of them don't want to. That, sadly, is bad enough.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: wetal w Luty 09, 2005, 01:19:13 pm
Good conclusion
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: SoGo w Luty 14, 2005, 12:43:26 pm
It's a problem of minority:
If one don't wan't to live in harmony with all, maybe all are forced to live in that way.
Independent if they wan't or not.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: wetal w Marzec 04, 2005, 01:00:17 pm
Every man is an exception , it is natural when he can`t live in harmony with the others. Otherwise this harmony is illusory. Each man should percept himself as personality that has no analog. All people have aim , those who don`t realize it form the majority , all the components of which think about someone who thinks about them. A minority commands the majority. There`s
a choice whom to join.........
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Marzec 25, 2005, 11:31:58 pm
I'm not telling you not to feel exceptional, do it if it fits you, but you have to admit that there is another point of view which is absolutely equivalent to Yours: that there is no individuality, and that the independence from group is illusory, because it breaks the natural harmony of the 'human herd'.

And there is no proof that the 'majority' of people suspend the harmony, whereas the 'independent ones' fight it as a minority. It's just a simple mind tactics that can make you feel exceptional easily. To be honest most of the philosophy of the western world is based on this assumtions (that every individual being is as independent as it wishes to, end is an absolute exception).
Note that it only creates the the mind-image of a person who can do virtually anything he/she likes, and is a god of his/hers own.
So he/she is an ideal shop client :) Money economy philosophy, that is:)

Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: wetal w Marzec 30, 2005, 11:15:54 am
Thank you Terminus for response but I suppose you agree that there is no  collective or society is capable to be as perfect as individuality.All we have in our life is a work of individuals.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: wetal w Maj 09, 2005, 01:18:45 pm
I didn`t want to conclude the topic. Maybe someone more capable will perform the anthem to the man`s M.I.N.D.
THERE`S NO LIMIT OF PERFECTION OF THE MAN`S MIND  AND THE END OF THE ANTHEM DEVOTED TO IT.
 Plz improve me sometimesif I`m telling nonsanse.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: SG w Maj 10, 2005, 05:48:14 pm
Cytuj
there is no  collective or society is capable to be as perfect as individuality


For me, there is no such thing as perfection. Perfection exists only to aspire to it. It's impossible to attain, 'cause we'll never be as perfect as we want, we'll always want to be more perfect than we are.

Every person and every group is able to effectuate great things. I think collectives and societies are capable to be as good as individuality, it depends from the situation which we pose.

Cytuj
THERE`S NO LIMIT OF PERFECTION OF THE MAN`S MIND(...)


The point is, that the group is some number - x - of individuals. There are a lot of minds ( I'm revealing, huh? ;D) and "the limit of... let it be... perfection of the man's mind", that means infinity, increases by x. ;)
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Deckert w Maj 10, 2005, 08:33:04 pm
Well, in my humble opinion there is something like a PERFECTION. This is something that most of us tend to. I will quote a nice sentence from a sci-fi movie "The Sphere" - "(...) when Pope Benedict asked Giotto for a drawing to prove his worth as an artist, what he did was draw a perfect circle freehand. Perfection is a powerful message".
It's not possible for us to achieve an absolute perfection, 'coz we're just human, but we have our day-to-day targets which we aim to. These efforts make us more perfect every day.

That's why I gotta agree with wetal who typed:
Cytuj
THERE`S NO LIMIT OF PERFECTION OF THE MAN`S MIND


We still don't know what we're capable of, 'coz human mind is a riddle.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: SG w Maj 10, 2005, 11:12:53 pm
Well, I see I must emend my statement.

I mean, that a perfection is unattainable. You can try to attain it, but you'll never do. That's ONLY a thing which we aim to, nothing and nobody is perfect. "Efforts make us more perfect every day", that's true, but only more, never full.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Maj 11, 2005, 01:35:44 am
Cytuj
what he did was draw a perfect circle freehand.


You could watch Scorcese's Last Temptation of Christ. There is a scene, where Jesus draws a circle in the sand, in order to sit in the middle of it. Powerful symbolics there.

Cheers.
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Terminus w Maj 11, 2005, 01:42:46 am
Cytuj
I mean, that a perfection is unattainable. You can try to attain it, but you'll never do. That's ONLY a thing which we aim to, nothing and nobody is perfect. "Efforts make us more perfect every day", that's true, but only more, never full.


It's a matter of definition. Perfection cannot be attained -  by definition, because it is defined by denial of every attempt to attain it:) It's just like supremum (upper extrema, upper limit) in mathematics. An element S, defined for a given set A, that is greater (in some sense (eg. bigger, larger, etc.)) than any element of A. It's worth noticing, that S doesn't have to be a part of A at all ! This is just the case of perfection.

So once again, perfection is just one more of ideas, designed by humans to help them exist. Other ones follow: eternity, infinity, timelesness, emptiness...

Luckily, not peacefulness.

Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: SoGo w Maj 17, 2005, 09:11:10 pm
Cytuj
So once again, perfection is just one more of ideas, designed by humans to help them exist. Other ones follow: eternity, infinity, timelesness, emptiness...

Luckily, not peacefulness.



The define of the undefinable.
;D
Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: Laszlo Katona w Maj 27, 2005, 02:14:36 am
All regards for Clapaucius!

Where have been eliminated the original theme: what is the centre of Lem's philisophy?

You are right. The question is: Lem are an atheist, or a believer? He declare: "I'm a non believer", but his works shows he is.
He never admit that the human nature or the whole universe can not conclude from the (spiritual?) forms of accidental falling athoms (Demokritos), but what he wrote ever made ridiculous it.
The next question is: anybody, who can't beleive in materialism could be a beleiver in the same time? It seems not. Because to be a believer must take a huge step: isn't enough to believe in "kharma", or such supernatural powres, but must believe in a Person, Who wanted that we (and the whole univers) can egsist. Lem didn't wrote a word about it, because if anybody start to thinkin on human history, can see that the nation of Bible had a very unic state in that, and it can not expicable with tools of any science.
Therefore he can't reach that level when the phillosophy starting to be interesting, but nobody was near to his thoughts in the XX. century.

An example: there was a philosopher in the "dark" middle ages, who stated that God could create a universe, if He(?) wanted, what seems to be an everlasting (non created) one. Why not?

The answer of this question is not a "scientific" (object) one, but a moral. Some evolucionist thinkers (exp. Lem) states that the moral is simply a strategic tool in the fight of life, which can explain from genetics, but they can't answere to that question: maybe it is possible, but why much more successful tool the moral than a claw or a horn. (...)

In that point leap out the non realistic dilemma: individual or mass (not only genus or race). But this ideas are only in our thinking: a delphin has never thinkin about himself as a delphin, he have a name. (In his thoughts, just like dogs, cats, birds, etc..) Therefore the "evolution" can not work with mass, or race, it can work only with individuums. What's with the ants? A dont know, but I think the individuum needs free choices, like dogs or cows, and that I don't see between insects (or some others).

But this isn't important. What important is that Lem point of view is a non-believer, but non materialistic one. Why? Because he didn't know nothing about JHWH? Or the amazing history of the nation of Bible? I think not, he started to live in a difficult world, when one person's origin can be a crime. I understand that he can't understand the religious ideas, when more than six million people was killed just because born "at the wrong place".

The "egzact", "objective", "overmoralist" science isn't capable to solve the most scientific questions, because the end of this ideas is the death, and not a simply one.  It is vain, to think that the death of a genom is same that a death of an individuum. In the true world is not such thing that a death of a genom. The extinct of the dinosaurs isn't true: distinct anymals was destroyed. If I could, I wrote a story about the last Iguanodon, who lived thousand years after the death of itkinds (sorry...).
Summa: Lem is a moralist, not an atheist, despite of what he states about himself. this is the true philosophy after the ancient greeks.

regards

Laslo Katona


Tytuł: Re: Lem as a philosof
Wiadomość wysłana przez: SoGo w Lipiec 04, 2005, 01:22:08 pm
What is there more about to say?