Sailing and Philosophy

[JamesG161]

I would suggest if you collided that Cargo Barge it was a Life decision.
Ok will Act as the Captain in his stead. [knowing a bit about him]

Options...
1) Collide
2) Take a longer course to arrive at X later, passing the Barge to the stern
3) Take the shorter course to arrive at X , passing the Barge Bow
4) Decide the destination X is not worth while.
5) Stop and wait.

Philosophical thought process and perhaps instant elimination....
1) I dont want my Crew or me to die... NOT 1)
2) My crew will mutiny and figuratively Kill Me... NOT 4)
Calculating Time and distant outcomes...
3) If I pass the Barge Bow it is shorter time, but there is a risk involved, if winds stop... NOT 3)

So the Captain selects Option 2) based on his subconscious Philosophy of respecting life and the value of living longer with respect to a loss of a bit of time.

Therefore...

Nothing significantly different.

Why can I suggest that?
Because all of your Life decision that may have been BAD at the time, weren't really
And...
A good Life Captain would see the BAD [sooner or later] and CHANGE his life course back toward his Target X.

I challenged @jssailem to that thought, since I have grown to know John from our PM's, Phone calls and Discussions, and he has a great life Philosophy.

One thing for sure, he has never stopped [option 5] because of Cargo Barge traffic [metaphorically speaking]

Dr. Jim...

 

[Will Gilmore]

The question is what would I do. What ever it is I would impact my time line and the events of my life in ways I can not fathom.

I believe you are wise to realize that. However, with knowledge and experience, your decisions, given whatever information life presents you with, combined with your known goals, allows you to make decisions with outcomes that are also predictable.
I use to believe that the most important philosophical question was "who am I?" A question of ontology.
Not anymore. I have come to realize that all this history of philosophy, religion, science, even the pursuit of power and wealth, through the ages, all stem from one all consuming question. "What should I do?" The fundamental question of ethics.
We all ask the other questions, pursue all the other actions with the goal of answering that one question. The problem arises, as so often does, when we forget the original thought in pursuit of some seemingly important detail and suddenly, that side trip becomes the all consuming goal.

How many examples in history as well as our everyday lives do we see of some small detail that becomes all we can concentrate on before we can move to our real goal. You want to sail, but first... . Learn to sail so you can cruise the world, becomes entering a few races. Gee, you want to get better, so now it's new racing sails. Then, a racing sailboat and soon you are hanging out at the yacht club talking about all the racing you are doing and no World cruising is going on. Does it matter? Sometimes, sometimes not.

I'm sorry I haven't been able to participate in this discussion more today. Our first renter is arriving tomorrow and the house isn't ready. The above discussion, I wrote this morning and am just now getting to finish it. Life's choices. I have to put our fowl to bed now.

This is an awesome thread. Thank you for staying with me.

- Will (Dragonfly)

 

[Scott T-Bird]

When I'm sailing it's not so much the thinking that attracts me as it is the feelings. Mostly, I'm seeking rhythm and that is why solitary endeavors seem to attract me the most. I can concentrate most on what I am seeking. I don't know what it is, but I can sail for hours, or ski for hours seeking one thing, and it's basically a physical state, not mental. The problem is that it can lead to loneliness. I probably felt the most satisfaction through windsurfing, which also led to the most self-centered behavior I've ever been. I think surfing is this way ... very solitary with a hugely addictive element.
I can't really relate to Jim's example because I don't really ever experience a perfect state with multiple's of people. There is almost never any occasion when a group of 3 or more want to do exactly the same thing, even when they get together to do the same thing. Somebody always dissents, somebody is always late, somebody never makes up their mind, somebody never expresses exactly what they want (and resents you for not somehow knowing) somebody always creates conflict. That also has to be taken into consideration as you are sailing towards a destination and a barge shows up in your way. Frustrations can lead to thoughts about colliding with the barge!

 

[jon hansen]

scott, when commanding my vessels, i think of it as akin to being a band's conductor. it is the conductor's job to keep everyone playing the same tune. it's very doable but does take skill. sorta like a lead dog, just no biting allowed.

 

[Kermit]

@Scott T-Bird the frustration with groups you describe sounds a lot like marriage. Although I’ve only had one wife at a time.

 

[Will Gilmore]

I can't really relate to Jim's example because I don't really ever experience a perfect state with multiple's of people. There is almost never any occasion when a group of 3 or more want to do exactly the same thing, even when they get together to do the same thing. Somebody always dissents, somebody is always late, somebody never makes up their mind, somebody never expresses exactly what they want (and resents you for not somehow knowing) somebody always creates conflict.

This is an excellent example of a group organism. In my Cognative Development class, the professor also taught philosophy, although I didn't have her for that. My final paper was on complex and group thinking as a single organism. I used cities as my primary example, but couples and groups of any makeup are the same. They don't even have to be groups of living thinking individuals. Any complex system can interact in such a way as to appear to think and make choices. Think about the brain as a complex structure completely dependent upon physical dynamics, think of a computer, now apply that to a school of fish or a planet or a star system.

The end result of a group action may not have much to do with the desires of any of its individuals. I dare say that the behavior of the Nazi party was not consistent with the behavior of most of its constituent parts, but the drive for social acceptance and membership combined with an individual's perception of what the group wants can lead to unintended choices. Yet they are still choices made as if by a single mind. Inner conflicts are simply natural. The outcomes are what we measure.

- Will (Dragonfly)

 

[JamesG161]

I can't really relate to Jim's example

The last few posts were trending about Philosophy, and I was giving an example of how we don't sit around and Think Philosophically. Your personal Philosophy is who you are. Some might call it Instincts.

I guess I should add to my Scenario Post #121
"The Captain and Crew decided Unanimously to head to Destination X"
_____
@Kermit just made my point. Way back in his early days of sailing he made a Choice...
To be a Pirate or Not

He is now pondering, what would have happened, if he had chosen the Pirate ways.....

I’ve only had one wife at a time.

Many Wenches

Jim...

 

[Kermit]

He is now pondering, what would have happened, if he had chosen the Pirate ways.....

Many Wenches

Jim...

Talk about thread drift. This takes us back to @agprice22 post about emergency lubrication.

 

[Scott T-Bird]

Although I’ve only had one wife at a time.

Why is it that it is either too few or too many ... but 1 doesn't seem like the right number?

 

[Kermit]

Why is it that it is either too few or too many ... but 1 doesn't seem like the right number?

I’ve had too many and too few. I have the exact right number now.

 

[Will Gilmore]

I’ve had too many and too few. I have the exact right number now.

I couldn't be happier for you, my friend.

I feel that a couple is one organism. Just because evolution has gone down the path of splitting gender into two independent actors, doesn't mean they have lost their connection as a single organism. Independent movement of two parts of a whole has enormous evolutionary advantages. The Ancients believed this. Listen to the words in a marriage ceremony. We are considered "joined as one". The Greek hero is often raised by his mother who provides and nurtures. From her, he gets the equipment he needs, the strength and the armor and often the weapons. Then, to truly be who he is, he is off to find his father or out on business arranged by his father. The masculine half provides the "personality", the sir name. The material comes from the feminine side (Gaia), the character comes from the masculine (Aether). Joseph Campell lays it out in his book "The Power of Myth". Neither the masculine nor the feminine side can exist without the other. One legend is that Gaea gave birth to Uranus (Father Sky), on her own, but proceeded to birth all the rest with Uranus as her husband.
Aphrodite was the firtility goddess of love and beauty. She is the one Empedocles described as holding the illusion of existence in our eyes. It was Strife who had the power to remove that illusion. The two were locked in a cyclical battle, life and death. Remember though, Aphrodite may be deluding us, but she was also the protector of sailors.

- Will (Dragonfly)

 

[sailnoproblem]

Damn Will, you sure have a lot time on your hands. I just finished reading all the posts on this thread, and you were able to answer everyone. I guess I don't put much thought into it I just sail for the enjoyment of it.
As for Philosophy, I believe everyone has there own (Thoughts). "No one is right if everybody is wrong" CSN&Y.
Yea I know I got off the OP.

 

[Tedd]

Will:
I'm surprised that Robert M. Pirsig hasn't come up yet in this thread. Are you familiar with his books? "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" is a fascinating read and, of course, the motorcycle maintenance bits have some relevance to sailing. And in "Lila" he uses a sailing trip as a metaphor for his philosophical musings, rather than a motorcycle trip. I enjoyed both books and have read each more than once. I believe Pirsig's philosophy is regarded with skepticism by most professional philosophers, but many ordinary people have found his ideas inspiring. His philosophy seems to be a blending of the Sophists with various eastern ideas, mainly Taoism.

 

[rpludwig]

wow, just read this thread, some brilliant minds on board, illuminating to say the least, and I have nothing to contribute mathematically.

Philosophically, I can recall (from my Western Political Theory studies), Plato's Theory of Knowledge, and Aristotle's views on women (by their very nature being inferior to men). I find the latter to be true from time to time when sailing, but I am hesitant to point that out to the Admiral, lest her wrath be brought upon me.

 

[Will Gilmore]

Aristotle's views on women (by their very nature being inferior to men).

And Aristotle being known for his philosophy of moderation. I suppose his views of women would only be seen as extreme in recent times.

Damn Will, you sure have a lot time on your hands. I just finished reading all the posts on this thread, and you were able to answer everyone. I guess I don't put much thought into it I just sail for the enjoyment of it.
As for Philosophy, I believe everyone has there own (Thoughts). "No one is right if everybody is wrong" CSN&Y.
Yea I know I got off the OP.

I have a bad addiction. Hello, my name is Will and I'm an SBO-holic.

As JamesG points out, we all have a philosophy, whether we think about it or not. Our actions tell the story, words can be less accurate, yet they are actions too.

Tedd, I have Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance sitting next to my bed. It is on my "To Read" list. I believe in the concept of Lila, without question. Creation, as a phenomenon of a mind is completely out of 'lila' (joy).

Reading Edith Hamilton or the Larosse Encyclopedia of Mythology, it seems that every religion or creation myth starts with 'desire' (the sense of something missing, the urge, loneliness, love). This quickly turns into 'will' or can be viewed as a form of will (look up Schopenhauer). Note, in the Abrihamic religions, desire is assumed. Then, from the firmament, God says, "let there be light." Then, God separates the night from the day. In none of the biblical texted I have read (two or three versions), he is not directly described as "creating". He says "light" and there was light. In the beginning there was the Word.
The Greeks had the concept of the Void, as nearly everyone does, but they called it Chaos. Cosmos, is a word that meant both ordered and beautiful (cosmetics). The creation myth seems more like imposing order onto chaos rather than bringing forth something out of nothing. Is this not what we do when we give names to things?
You are a land lubber and you step onto a full rigged ship and look around. Chaos. But then, a seaman tells you about the lines, shrouds, sheets, halyard,... The spars, masts, yards, sprits and gaffs, you learn the names and meanings of the different sails, the main and mizzen, the royal and the top gallents, the jibs and the spankers, and suddenly, order. You are halfway to being a sailor. Not creation, an awakening.

- Will (Dragonfly)

 

[Kermit]

I couldn't be happier for you, my friend.

I feel that a couple is one organism. Just because evolution has gone down the path of splitting gender into two independent actors, doesn't mean they have lost their connection as a single organism. Independent movement of two parts of a whole has enormous evolutionary advantages. The Ancients believed this. Listen to the words in a marriage ceremony. We are considered "joined as one". The Greek hero is often raised by his mother who provides and nurtures. From her, he gets the equipment he needs, the strength and the armor and often the weapons. Then, to truly be who he is, he is off to find his father or out on business arranged by his father. The masculine half provides the "personality", the sir name. The material comes from the feminine side (Gaia), the character comes from the masculine (Aether). Joseph Campell lays it out in his book "The Power of Myth". Neither the masculine nor the feminine side can exist without the other. One legend is that Gaea gave birth to Uranus (Father Sky), on her own, but proceeded to birth all the rest with Uranus as her husband.
Aphrodite was the firtility goddess of love and beauty. She is the one Empedocles described as holding the illusion of existence in our eyes. It was Strife who had the power to remove that illusion. The two were locked in a cyclical battle, life and death. Remember though, Aphrodite may be deluding us, but she was also the protector of sailors.

- Will (Dragonfly)

If we’re both one organism then why am I the only one in the doghouse?

 

[Scott T-Bird]

If we’re both one organism then why am I the only one in the doghouse?

Because you spend too much time on SBO?
(No need to ask me how I know!)

 

[Tedd]

Then, God separates the night from the day. In none of the biblical texted I have read (two or three versions), he is not directly described as "creating". He says "light" and there was light. In the beginning there was the Word.

This jibes with an interpretation I like, which is that it's a description of the beginning of consciousness, as in self awareness, awareness of the future, and awareness of one's own death.
I enjoy reading both ZAMM and Lila and have found the ideas in both to be helpful ways of thinking about the world. His division of 'Quality' into static and dynamic forms is, I think, a variant of the chaos-and-order idea. I also like the way (especially in ZAMM) he ties abstract ideas to real-world experiences such as working on a motorcycle or sailing a boat. I'm somewhat of a rationalist by nature and I'm fascinated by theory and 'pure' math (such as number theory) but, at the same time, I've come to believe that it's important not to lose touch with practical experience. A big part of the attraction of sailing, for me, is that working on the boat means dealing with the relentless reality of the material world and sailing the boat means dealing with the relentless reality of nature--winds and tides and all the rest. That's good for me and also so much fun!
Tedd

 

[Will Gilmore]

I'm somewhat of a rationalist by nature

Tedd, since you were kind enough to recommend a couple of books for me, let me return the favor. Author Peter Kingsley of the Golden Sufi Press has several books, "Reality", "The Dark Places of Wisdom", and more, that deal with presocratic philosophy, in particular Parmenades and Empedocles. Parmenades is considered the father of Rationalism. Kingsley tells about Parmenades' poem fragments, all we have of parmenades' teachings, written to one of his students. Parmenades describes a trip to the under world where he meets "the goddess" (most likely Persephone) who tells him the secrets of life so he can bring them back to the mortal world.
The goddess points out that all we have to experience Reality are our own senses. This is why Parmenades is the father of Rationalism.

Kingsley takes the position that Parmenades wasn't preaching rationalism at all. Kingsley arguess that Parmenades was a mystic to the core.

Philosophy had a branch called Natural Philosophy. Today, we call it Physics. Pythagoras founded the first school of philosophy for the purpose of studying the nature of the Universe and a formal and systematic approach to studying the natural world was one of the tools he and his monks gave us. This is when, in my view, the "modern" world began. Pythagoras and Cyrus the Great created the foundations upon which most of the distinguishing elements of our modern society are based on today. Logic was developed and formalized as another tool for this quest to understand the Universe. The entire endeavor of rationalism, logic, and science was intended to be a tool kit, mostly to convey belief to the uninitiated, for these mystic cults to study the Universe. Today, they are considered the answers, not just tools for demonstrating the answers to deeper meaning and the nature of the metaphysical universe. Funny though, cutting edge science with Quantum and String theory seems to be leading right back to a Universe described in more ancient terms by people who believed in a greater world than that which we can see or directly experience.
The wind pushes a Sailboat and proves the existence of something we can't see. Logic applied to scientific measurements. What are the conclusions about Reality?

- Will (Dragonfly)

 

[JamesG161]

What are the conclusions about Reality?

We always live in the past.
Jim...