A dog is as a dog does (e.g. "walks around with a lantern at noon").

:fire:

The disappointed man speaks.— I sought great human beings, I never found anything but the apes of their ideal. — Twilight of the Idols

"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the Music."

:death: :flower:

Was Diogenes mad as well as wise? — Hillary

He was a wandering ascetic. They were a constant feature of ancient cultures, they still exist in India to this day. The early Buddhist scriptures refer to 'dog duty ascetics' who apparently used to dwell with packs of dogs. They're obviously on the fringes, 'liminal', in anthropological terminology - on the outside of culture and society. As such, they represent a connection with the 'primordial', the unconditioned, or Nature.

doesn't Nietszche makes an obvious reference to Diogenes in the Parable of the Madman? Actually a bit of digging reveals that 'Diogenes Laertiades’ was how Nietzsche signed himself in a letter to a friend in his late 20s: ‘son of Laertius’, or literally ‘sprung from Laertius’, i.e. from Diogenes Laertius, so it seems certain.

I think Freddy was referring to 'Diogenes of Sinope' ...

.

Yeah, I know but it makes sense at some level, oui? Stage-wise evolution (aka life cycle in biology), aligned to the Chinese concept of yin-yang (rise & fall, crest &trough, peak & valley, to and fro, zenith & nadir). Last I checked, there's a plethora of books on the rise & fall of empires.

I think Freddy was referring to 'Diogenes of Sinope.' — 180 Proof

Right - I think the OP mislead me, or rather I have confused the two 'Diogenes'. Although the image of 'wandering the streets with a lamp' associated with Diogenes, is very similar to Nietszche's 'parable'.

"Diogenes syndrome is a disorder characterized by self-neglect, domestic squalor, apathy, compulsive hoarding of garbage and more importantly lack of shame. The syndrome does not refer to the intelligence or the philosophies of Diogenes but rather refers to the way Diogenes lived." — Hillary

This is fair and accurate.

Even animals would prefer cleanliness, unless they're ill of some malady. Cats definitely show health by how clean they keep themselves. You'll know it when they're not feeling well, or they're neglected -- they'd also stop grooming themselves. Dogs prefer clean environment -- they don't shit where they eat.

Public bath facilities were one of the best contributions of the ancients to the world.

From Wikipedia:
"The Kali Yuga, in Hinduism, is the fourth and worst of the four yugas (world ages) in a Yuga Cycle, preceded by Dvapara Yuga and followed by the next cycle's Krita (Satya) Yuga. It is believed to be the present age, which is full of conflict and sin."

Hinduism! The biggest of the polytheistic movements. More fairy story BS to me! — universeness

And still, how close the Kali Yuga is to the truth... Closer than any science and it's "objective" division of time in billions of lightyears, the emergence of Earth in a primordial solar system, the assigning of periods in evolution, and the mere blink of an eye existence of people on the cosmic scale.

"World Population by Religion

About 85% of the world's people identify with a religion."

Which means: woowoo accepted! — Hillary

You know what, this clearly shows that people don't know themselves all too well. Being religious isn't just a matter of being brought up in a faith, following its traditions, celebrating the relevant festivals, etc. If I were to ever claim to be a believer, I'd need to act/behave in ways that, at the very least, indicate I endorse the truth of an afterlife. I shouldn't be :cry: at a funeral, nor should I express any sympathy for wars, genocide, and so on unless...deep down we know we're all going to hell! :chin:

Yeah, after two and a half years without having touched water I have gained some extra weight. The flies around my head attack the pussie crawling through the collected dirt between my filthy long hair and beard. Even the dog won't approach me anymore...

Public bath facilities were one of the best contributions of the ancients to the world. — L'éléphant

Apparently more like one of the greatest vectors of disease in the ancient world (well Rome at least), since they apparently were not cleaned and the water replaced often enough

"World Population by Religion

About 85% of the world's people identify with a religion."

Which means: woowoo accepted — Hillary

I like the old adage, "There are lies, damned lies and then statistics!"
You can often project stats any way you like.
I don't remember taking part in this survey, do you?
85% of the people they asked and who exactly did they ask.
If you ask someone in an Islamic country if they believe in god. Do you think they would be brave enough to say no?
Even if your chosen stat is accurate, to me it just confirms the depressing fact that you can still dupe most humans some of the time.

Yeah, I know but it makes sense at some level, oui? Stage-wise evolution (aka life cycle in biology), aligned to the Chinese concept of yin-yang (rise & fall, crest &trough, peak & valley, to and fro, zenith & nadir). Last I checked, there's a plethora of books on the rise & fall of empires — Agent Smith

But I advise people to be very skeptical about the genuine PREDICTIVE POWER of such 'undulating' systems you describe. Sure, 'ups and down' just like water waves, projected onto the human concepts
of good times and bad times. Joseph and his dream of fat cows and thin cows. We are currently going through conflict and sin in today's world. But remember the current media system is a sensationalist system. They have little interest in reporting any good news, even though there is plenty of it.
There has never been a time in human existence when there was no conflict or 'subjective' sin.
I see systems like ying/yang etc as manna for the 'let's predict the future,' game/way to make a living.
Not much better than astrology/tarot cards/reading palms, tea leaves or chicken entrails.
I remember an expose of a particular charleton who gave audiences, messages from dead loved ones.
He actually had a whole team of researchers who would find out as much as they could about targeted audience members. They targeted based on credit card bookings. They found out names and addresses and would visit houses and look through windows with powerful lenses. Audience members were astounded at how much the performing con man knew about individual audience members.
He made a lot of money before the undercover reporter exposed him.
So if I predict that the Russian system, The Chinese system, The American system will all fall.
Then I will probably be proved correct. All systems change over time, eventually.

I'll use everything against you! "Sustained!".

"Then Woowoo should be allowed to base life on your honor!"

And still, how close the Kali Yuga is to the truth... Closer than any science and it's "objective" division of time in billions of lightyears, the emergence of Earth in a primordial solar system, the assigning of periods in evolution, and the mere blink of an eye existence of people on the cosmic scale. — Hillary

I'm not impressed at all by such predictive systems. They simply view the regularity of events over time and use such regularity to make predictions that are highly likely due to regularity.
Did the Kali Yuga posit gravity or atoms or quarks or the speed of light being constant?

I'll use everything against you! "Sustained!".

"Then Woowoo should be allowed to base life on your honor!" — Hillary

Who is using what against who?
I am appealing to your rationale.
I am trying to convince you that you will have a more fulfilling life if you combat
mental schisms such as polytheism using every erg of determined energy you can.
Base your life on woo woo and you will never defeat the likelihood of
falling in love with a pigeon or wrapping your lips around a car exhaust.
I understand the curio of the venerated lunatic genius but I think there
are far better ways to live and be.
It's quite sad in my opinion that so many good thinkers surrender to woo woo and
hope against hope that they will receive a sign from the nonexistent supernatural.
That must be quite frustrating.
How do you account for my 'happy, fulfilled' godless life?
Do you not believe that I am a happy, contented person for the vast majority of moments in time as they pass?

...And stay skeptical. — Carneades.org

If it's not a sinusoidal function what is it then?

How do you account for my 'happy, fulfilled' godless life?
Do you not believe that I am a happy, contented person for the vast majority of moments in time as they pass? — universeness

How can I account for your life? It's quite simple. We live in two different worlds. Who says there is only one? My world is one with gods, yours one without. Now who is right? Both!

How can I account for your life? It's quite simple. We live in two different worlds. Who says there is only one? My world is one with gods, yours one without. Now who is right? Both! — Hillary

:fire:

That way, we can continue pretending that our particular brand of ‘civilised humanity’ is the only way to be, and that the world and people are ordered and predictable.
— Possibility

But our particular brand of what is considered 'civilised behaviour,' changes from village to village all the way to nation to nation. We don't have the same guidelines of civility as the ancient Sumerians or the more recent Victorians. I am not ready to advocate for men and women to masturbate, if they choose to, in public, on the buses and trains, on their way to the office, are you? — universeness

I agree with what you’re saying, but I think you’re missing the point. Diogenes wasn’t advocating the behaviour itself, I think he was aiming to increase awareness, to challenge the ignorant and exclusive nature of a ‘civil’ life. This was performance art in an era of low literacy - a living, breathing critique of social behaviour which made it into written folklore. It was an opportunity for philosophical self-reflection, not to advocate a change in the law to enable people to masturbate in public, but to confront the public ‘self’ with the private ‘self’.

Just now read your comment, and I like it very much! Challenging the custom standard behaviors, ideas, theories, is something I liked my whole life. Which brought me into considerable difficulties... Being bipolar, as so nicely labeled by our psychologists, makes the situation even worse, cause in a "manic episode" most inhibitions subside to give way to the big buzz of the fantastic high you find yourself in. Masturbating in public is something on my bucket list still...

I love Australian philosopher Roman Krznaric (Chris nar ic), one of the founders of the Empathy Museum. And the anarchistic epistemology of Feyerabend is a welcome diversion from the strict standards. For good reason he is labeled "the clown of the philosophy of science": Anything goes! A crazy though? Maybe, but surely closer to reality than standards. Which is mainly Popper (most scientists subscribe to his idea of science, based on falsification) but more recent philosophers, like Ian Hacking (who wrote, BTW, in a critique on the third print on Against Method that he had never seen it before that in three subsequent print of a book, three different books were written, and even the covers are different!) and Pickering (Constructing Quarks) blow a fresh cooling wind into the steamy hot classroom! Call them mad, clowns, dogs, maladapted, maladjusted, offline, abnormal, etc. but this labeling is, as you wisely suggested, is just the labeling of fellow men in their attempt to defend their own standards.

I'm not impressed at all by such predictive systems. — universeness

Nor am I about your predictions of a future with transpeople, people who live 300 years, or people who space away to other planets. It's an impressive picture you paint, but a lot of woowoo is involved, and it draws attention away from matters that really matter.

I agree with what you’re saying, but I think you’re missing the point. Diogenes wasn’t advocating the behaviour itself, I think he was aiming to increase awareness, to challenge the ignorant and exclusive nature of a ‘civil’ life. This was performance art in an era of low literacy - a living, breathing critique of social behaviour which made it into written folklore. It was an opportunity for philosophical self-reflection, not to advocate a change in the law to enable people to masturbate in public, but to confront the public ‘self’ with the private ‘self’. — Possibility

:clap: :clap: :clap:

...And stay skeptical.
— Carneades.org
If it's not a sinusoidal function what is it then? — Agent Smith

Well, I advocate for storing many useful apps in your mental toolbox and healthy skeptisism is a useful app in my opinion but I was not suggesting you become like Carneades and become as he is described in from wiki, as:
" perhaps the most prominent head of the Skeptical Academy in ancient Greece."

What is the 'It' you are referring to as 'sinusoidal?' Human life experience? The ebb and flow of that which humans label good and bad times? A mathematical waveform which for you, marries with the suggestions put forward by the Hindu yugas?
If you are suggesting such a regularity is the main dictate in life then I disagree as science has a great deal of evidence that although there certainly are dictated regularities, they can at any time be altered temporarily or permanently by error/anomaly/mutation etc.

How can I account for your life? It's quite simple. We live in two different worlds. Who says there is only one? My world is one with gods, yours one without. Now who is right? Both! — Hillary

That's not the question. How can the godless be in the mainstream, happy and live fulfilled productive meaningful lives? How can any member of the godless groups make the world a little bit of a better place due to their existence and their efforts and actions whilst utterly rejecting the god posit?
These gods are utterly powerless. Atheists prove every day that you don't need them AT ALL to live a good life. Theism is supposed to be needed by humans to live properly. So how come all atheists are not having a terrible life?

I agree with what you’re saying, but I think you’re missing the point. Diogenes wasn’t advocating the behaviour itself, I think he was aiming to increase awareness, to challenge the ignorant and exclusive nature of a ‘civil’ life. This was performance art in an era of low literacy - a living, breathing critique of social behaviour which made it into written folklore. It was an opportunity for philosophical self-reflection, not to advocate a change in the law to enable people to masturbate in public, but to confront the public ‘self’ with the private ‘self’. — Possibility

Well, we probably agree in the main then. I don't wish to ban the maverick artist or to prevent individuals who wish to point out the hypocrisy of what some people act like and claim they believe in and practice in public and what they actually act like, do believe in, and do practice in private, but Its how you go about such protestations that matter within a particular village, city or nation.

A politician who watches porn in the house of commons should not keep his job as an MP by claiming that he was merely making a statement of art or that he was making a point about those people who watch porn privately but don't admit to doing so publically.
If Diogenes masturbated in public in front of strangers then it's correct that he be arrested and charged with some public affray infringement, regardless of any claims he might make about art statements or stands against societal hypocrisies. If he is found to be mentally compromised then he should not be charged with anything but should receive the mental health assistance he needs.
Such situations must be measured against the realpolitik of the time and place they happen.

Nor am I about your predictions of a future with transpeople, people who live 300 years, or people who space away to other planets. It's an impressive picture you paint, but a lot of woowoo is involved, and it draws attention away from matters that really matter — Hillary

Predictions based on science are not woo woo. Predictions based on belief in the supernatural are woo woo because their source is woo woo. Science predictions are based on projecting evidence already established by empirical evidence, if they are not, then such claimed scientific hypotheses are normally rejected for being nonscientific.

That's not the question. — universeness

So the question is:

How can the godless be in the mainstream, happy and live fulfilled productive meaningful lives? — universeness

They obviously can! I nowhere denied that. Like I said, if you are happy in denying them or believe they are fantasies like Santa, Satan, the evil devil, or bat-, super, or the SemiTorus Guy, then you are happy. But as you know I think I found a cosmology, which until now has withstand all critique (even my own!), apart from one detail to be fixed. So, now I know the fundamental makeup, there is only one means to give a reason for that material to exist and return the wonder to life and the universe which science had taken from it.

How can any member of the godless groups make the world a little bit of a better place due to their existence and their efforts and actions whilst utterly rejecting them — universeness

I can't see why that could not be the case.

These gods are utterly powerless. — universeness

But they have the power of creation. Which humans lack (creating matter from nothing).

Atheists prove every day that you don't need them AT ALL to live a good life. — universeness

I don't need them too. Not at all. They just offer closure and return the lost wonder. Universal life is just a temporary divine material version of the eternal heavenly life. And because they made it, we should be careful with nature (heaven kinda looks like the pristine state of nature, untouched by mankind). And yes, there it is: the moral!

If Diogenes masturbated in public in front of strangers then it's correct that he be arrested and charged with some public affray infringement, regardless of any claims he might make about art — universeness

But how does he hurt people by doing that in public? What harm is done, apart maybe from cleaning up eventual sperm shot at public chairs in the doctor's waiting room. It might be entertaining in fact! Especially in a boring waiting room. Or pedagogical even.

Well, we probably agree in the main then. I don't wish to ban the maverick artist or to prevent individuals who wish to point out the hypocrisy of what some people act like and claim they believe in and practice in public and what they actually act like, do believe in, and do practice in private, but Its how you go about such protestations that matter within a particular village, city or nation.

A politician who watches porn in the house of commons should not keep his job as an MP by claiming that he was merely making a statement of art or that he was making a point about those people who watch porn privately but don't admit to doing so publically.
If Diogenes masturbated in public in front of strangers then it's correct that he be arrested and charged with some public affray infringement, regardless of any claims he might make about art statements or stands against societal hypocrisies. If he is found to be mentally compromised then he should not be charged with anything but should receive the mental health assistance he needs.
Such situations must be measured against the realpolitik of the time and place they happen. — universeness

I think you’re still missing the point. There’s obviously a part of us that is keen to isolate someone who behaves in this way as something ‘other’ than this ‘self’ we present to the world, something that should be hidden away, denied, excluded, or repaired. How we respond to behaviour such as this says a lot about our self-awareness and integrity. It’s telling that you’ve used a politician as your example - a public figure who represents us - we react strongly against our public representative behaving in a way we’d prefer to keep private.

But this doesn’t settle the questions that Diogenes is presenting. What, precisely, is wrong with masturbating in public that is not wrong in private? I get that ‘society’ as a structure of civil order makes this distinction and is expected to reprimand him, but what is it that ‘disturbs our peace’? Why am I so keen to distinguish him from my ‘self’? It’s interesting how keenly we tend to align our ‘selves’ with ‘societal order’ on the behaviour of others.