|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 10:12 am
definitions the doctrine that life is the basic reality, of which everything else is a form or manifestation the idea that life processes have a component entirely separate from the constraints of the laws of natural science theory that life originates due to a force distinct from chemical and other physical forces. The classical 18th century vitalist doctrines propose that all life phenomena are animated by immaterial life spirits. ... I posted some definitions of what the vitalist doctrine is all about. Don't put so much attention in the 3rd concept because vitalism turned into a philosophy that neither granted absolute truthfulnes to science and spirituality (XIX-XX century). (For more information look for "Ortega y Gasset") One of the most famous followers of the Vitalist movement in my country was Alberto Masferrer. Who designed (with other vitalists, I suppose) an economic system who was based in vitalism and some parts of socialism (But didn't claimed to be a complete leftist ideology). It proclaimed that evrything has to be reduced to a minimum, to what was necessary for living. This ideology/system was baptised as "Minimum Vitalism". If you would like to know more about this, I have the book and I am willing to translate it for you. But only if everyone agrees, because I wouldn't like to waste my time in writing something that nobody wants to read.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:16 pm
So, if I'm reading this right, the theory states that the focus should be reduced back to basic human needs?
There are speculations, which I'm rather inclined to agree with often enough, that in the vast sweep of modernization and technology, there's a certain almost spiritual dimension of existence that becomes cast aside and replaced with a shallow consumerism. Not that I don't appreciate having a computer and being able to talk to people like this, in fact, it's probably led me to becoming the person who I am today, but there is a certain depth to simplicity that the modern world is often oblivious to. But then, I suppose it varies according to the person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 6:18 pm
Lady Merewyn So, if I'm reading this right, the theory states that the focus should be reduced back to basic human needs? There are speculations, which I'm rather inclined to agree with often enough, that in the vast sweep of modernization and technology, there's a certain almost spiritual dimension of existence that becomes cast aside and replaced with a shallow consumerism. Not that I don't appreciate having a computer and being able to talk to people like this, in fact, it's probably led me to becoming the person who I am today, but there is a certain depth to simplicity that the modern world is often oblivious to. But then, I suppose it varies according to the person. Mostly it is a way to satisfy the basic human needs. It doesn't reduces them, it only proposes a fair way to fulfill everyone's needs. I could resume it with a phrase that karl marx said: "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:11 pm
I call BS. What ever my "most basic needs" are determined by the culture and techonlogy I grow up in. Taken to the highest extreme this doctrine would mean we all get a small cube to sleep in, a bowl of rice, a pot to s**t in, and nothing else. Nothing pissed me off like aesthic communism. Communism should be fighting for the right of everyone to have more s**t!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:53 pm
Steve Sage I call BS. What ever my "most basic needs" are determined by the culture and techonlogy I grow up in. Taken to the highest extreme this doctrine would mean we all get a small cube to sleep in, a bowl of rice, a pot to s**t in, and nothing else. Nothing pissed me off like aesthic communism. Communism should be fighting for the right of everyone to have more s**t! Actually, this doctrine only makes sure that everyone can get the things they basically need, The more everyone can have , the better it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 10:00 pm
Handmade Soldier Steve Sage I call BS. What ever my "most basic needs" are determined by the culture and techonlogy I grow up in. Taken to the highest extreme this doctrine would mean we all get a small cube to sleep in, a bowl of rice, a pot to s**t in, and nothing else. Nothing pissed me off like aesthic communism. Communism should be fighting for the right of everyone to have more s**t! Actually, this doctrine only makes sure that everyone can get the things they basically need, The more everyone can have , the better it is. Alright its not the aesthic communism "less is more" bs, that is good to know buuuut What the ******** is this "basic need" bullshit. What the ******** does that actually mean? Need for what? Biological survial, hapniess, wisdom, etc? Its so vauge it could mean anything
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 9:05 pm
Handmade Soldier Steve Sage What the ******** is this "basic need" bullshit. What the ******** does that actually mean? Need for what? Biological survial, hapniess, wisdom, etc? Its so vauge it could mean anything -_- what are the things that you need in order to live?.... Nother clue: wisdom is not necesary to live, example: retarded people still breathe and walk. need another clue?....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 2:03 pm
wow what an intelligent conversation you are all making. Damn you guys are asses. What the ******** do you need more for? necessity is all you need to live , anything else with no meaning is s**t.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 6:32 pm
Steve... I know you well enough to know that you do know very well what "basic needs" implies and are playing devil's advocate.
The point is that it's regrettable that there are children in this world who are starving to death whilst at the same time we live in a society and culture so resplendent with technological advances. The point is that the focus should be shifted to promoting the basics for everyone instead of mindlessly seeking "more, more, more."
One will also find that there is a spiritual dimension which is sadly lacking in modern consumerist society. By a spiritual dimension, I'm not speaking of religion, of course, but rather pondering, intellectualism, and enlightenment. There's far more to life than material things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 4:23 pm
Lady Merewyn One will also find that there is a spiritual dimension which is sadly lacking in modern consumerist society. By a spiritual dimension, I'm not speaking of religion, of course, but rather pondering, intellectualism, and enlightenment. There's far more to life than material things. I am going to agree with Nieztche in disagring with you, the spritualist aesthic seniment is something that arouse of jealousy of the priest class. Communism shouldn't be a force of resenment like spirualist reglion. Communism should evlate humanity to the highest peaks of scinice and materialism. There is already a spritualist doctrine that tells man to do without, it's called Christianity. If you want Communism to be aesthic and spirtual then just read the Bible and put down your Communist Manifesto.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 8:08 am
Steve Sage Lady Merewyn One will also find that there is a spiritual dimension which is sadly lacking in modern consumerist society. By a spiritual dimension, I'm not speaking of religion, of course, but rather pondering, intellectualism, and enlightenment. There's far more to life than material things. I am going to agree with Nieztche in disagring with you, the spritualist aesthic seniment is something that arouse of jealousy of the priest class. Communism shouldn't be a force of resenment like spirualist reglion. Communism should evlate humanity to the highest peaks of scinice and materialism. There is already a spritualist doctrine that tells man to do without, it's called Christianity. If you want Communism to be aesthic and spirtual then just read the Bible and put down your Communist Manifesto. Pft. You think the Bible is spiritual in any way whatsoever? I already mentioned that I wasn't talking about religion, but rather to noticing the deeper aspects of life. Much as I love Nietzsche, I'm going to partly disagree with him on this one. I'm not searching for asceticism, Steve. What I'm searching for is a world in which asceticism will be unnecessary for each person's needs and wishes to be filled. I'm merely noting that doing things (eg, labor) solely for material benefit reduces an action to a monetary transaction, which I find to be rather devoid of meaning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 12:03 am
Once again, I have to side with the Obach... Quote: the doctrine that life is the basic reality, of which everything else is a form or manifestation the idea that life processes have a component entirely separate from the constraints of the laws of natural science theory that life originates due to a force distinct from chemical and other physical forces. The classical 18th century vitalist doctrines propose that all life phenomena are animated by immaterial life spirits. ... "The idea that life processes have a component entirely separate from the constraints of the laws of natural science" That is, a soul. There, this is crap. There is no soul, and to say that there is, is a slap in the face to communism. Everything is ultimately knowable, and to say that there is a something which isn't, that isnt under the 'constraints' of natural science is to say that we have within us something which has everlasting life, a soul. That is crap. This is pious twaddle. now, life is not the basic reality. The universe was around before there was anything alive in it and will continue to exist should everything alive in it die. To say that this can be reduced to 'basic needs-ism' is to obscure the anti-communist message that this priests doctrine puts forward. Remember: Dialectical Materialism. Oh, and Hi.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 3:17 pm
Gracchvs Once again, I have to side with the Obach... Quote: the doctrine that life is the basic reality, of which everything else is a form or manifestation the idea that life processes have a component entirely separate from the constraints of the laws of natural science theory that life originates due to a force distinct from chemical and other physical forces. The classical 18th century vitalist doctrines propose that all life phenomena are animated by immaterial life spirits. ... "The idea that life processes have a component entirely separate from the constraints of the laws of natural science" That is, a soul. There, this is crap. There is no soul, and to say that there is, is a slap in the face to communism. Everything is ultimately knowable, and to say that there is a something which isn't, that isnt under the 'constraints' of natural science is to say that we have within us something which has everlasting life, a soul. That is crap. This is pious twaddle. now, life is not the basic reality. The universe was around before there was anything alive in it and will continue to exist should everything alive in it die. To say that this can be reduced to 'basic needs-ism' is to obscure the anti-communist message that this priests doctrine puts forward. Remember: Dialectical Materialism. Oh, and Hi. *rolls eyes* The issue is that material goods are not the sole source of happiness in life. Even when looking at dialectical materialism, one would find that when we disconnect the idea of money from work, we afford more dignity than mere wage slavery. My idea isn't so antithetical to communism as you might think. And long time no see smile .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 9:50 am
I think we may be crossing our wires and misunderstanding each other.
I am disagring with the idea that "basic" needs such as shealter, food, and medical care are the ONLY needs that need to provided and that all other "needs" are produced by evil captialist overlords.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
