I like to get philosophical with people, but the problem with that is when is the best time? I just really like to think deep* and beyond our daily lives and I get a small thrill from it. However, not everyone feels the same way. Sometimes, when hanging out with a group of friends, I like to pop a philosophical question. Only a couple of times have I ever participated in a legit conversation with people, but a majority of the time, they either turn it into a joke or shrug it off saying "I dunno." Which, you know, is cool considering it's not a typical daily conversational topic anyways.

So I suppose I'm opening a thread here to allow you all to post your "philosophical questions" and we can talk about them because I know that feel. I love talking about this sort of crap.

Note: To whoever reads or posts in this thread, you are agreeing to respect people's opinions and should respond respecting their opinons as well.

*deep - [size=2]a relative term

being a measure of the

complexity [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif]

of a statement, especially with regards to layers of meaning

[/font]

I have this theory where I think that people are like processes on a CPU. You get to experience the world from your own eyes, you have your own memories, and your own feelings, but that is like the parameters of a process that get loaded during the tiny time slice it gets when actively running on the CPU.

Then, you experience the world from another person's perspective, with his memories/feelings/etc.

That's why I'm nice to other people. Cuz I'm just as much me as I am them.

I have this theory where I think that people are like processes on a CPU. You get to experience the world from your own eyes, you have your own memories, and your own feelings, but that is like the parameters of a process that get loaded during the tiny time slice it gets when actively running on the CPU.

Then, you experience the world from another person's perspective, with his memories/feelings/etc.

That's why I'm nice to other people. Cuz I'm just as much me as I am them.

I've thought a similar thought. This idea also extends, for me, as far as saying that we are much like computers than we realize. Which is why I'm so fascinated by A.I. and believing we can achieve some sort of relative concept by constructing an entity that might be human-like.

We do act somewhat like computers, but yet we don't. We have small chemicals that store our visual and stimulus memories (I forgot what they're called in the brain) but we are analogous whereas machines are binary.

I have this theory that when most people get philosophical, they're completely full of themselves and have decided to turn off their brains and rational thought in favor of simply making stuff up. Almost like religion. I've also noticed a tendency of philosophy and philosophers to use fields and concepts they don't understand -- especially science and engineering concepts -- to justify things that make no sense.

Yeah, I'm not a big fan of "being philosophical" at any point.

I have this theory that when most people get philosophical, they're completely full of themselves and have decided to turn off their brains and rational thought in favor of simply making stuff up. Almost like religion. I've also noticed a tendency of philosophy and philosophers to use fields and concepts they don't understand -- especially science and engineering concepts -- to justify things that make no sense.

Yeah, I'm not a big fan of "being philosophical" at any point.

It might have been a poor choice of words in your case, but it's the best I could come up with. I have met people that, as you explained, go as far as "making things up that make no sense", but in other ways it's just for fun. And you're right: it does justify material that does not make much logical sense (and forces them to tie together), but you know I made this thread for people to discuss this and that for the sake of discussion. Some material does lead to interesting topics. And those topics could lead to interesting discoveries (not saying that anything we might talk about here will be "world changing" but we are in the Lounge after all). For instance, I have a fascination with the human mind. Because of my many, as some might say "philosophical thoughts", I decided to do my Capstone project on it.

But being philosophical about being philosophical, Promit; nice touch. ;)

I have this theory that when most people get philosophical, they're completely full of themselves and have decided to turn off their brains and rational thought in favor of simply making stuff up. Almost like religion. I've also noticed a tendency of philosophy and philosophers to use fields and concepts they don't understand -- especially science and engineering concepts -- to justify things that make no sense.

I thought that was just the post-modernists and literary critics.

I'd argue that what you're describing (what I think you're describing?) is not actually philosophy.There's being philosophical, and "being philosophical." One is legitimate rational enquiry into some aspect of one's life, and one is only a masquerade. I think the former is quite valuable, and doesn't need to be limited to topics usually considered "philosophical." I think philosophy is ultimately not (no longer?) about the way things are despite the fact that it is often misunderstood to be so, as much of that role has been taken over by science, but rather about what we should do about said things. A philosophical line of argument would be something like: "the world appears to behave in such and such a way... so therefore if we value such and such a thing, we should act in such and such a way." One might also consider the discussion of values and the selection thereof as philosophical, as well, since ultimately the selection of values is what will drive our motivations, and therefore our actions. Then there are also discussions of semantics, which are vitally important to philosophical discussion (since without everybody on the same page regarding definitions, not a whole lot is going to be meaningfully communicated), but may not qualify as philosophical per se. I suppose one could argue that if everybody held the same definitions of the terms at hand, and used the same methods of reasoning to manipulate those terms, they would end up with the same conclusions at each other, and therefore coming to a definition everybody agrees on implies that they will agree on conclusions, as well.

Chances are we have all heard genuinely philosophical discourse and have not recognized it.

I disagree with OP's definition of "deep," though I must admit I have neither used nor heard the term used enough to put forward one that I'm confident in. I tend to think of "deepness" as being a measure of the complexity of a statement, especially with regards to layers of meaning. "Deep" to me does not imply "spiritual" - it implies "meaningful".

Then, you experience the world from another person's perspective, with his memories/feelings/etc.
That's why I'm nice to other people. Cuz I'm just as much me as I am them.

Aside from the CPU analogy, that's a really old and common belief
When we use the word "self", we're often referring to the data that's controlled by your Thread, but really our true selves are the Threads themselves, which when purged of their data are without identity. All the threads themselves live inside the CPU, which is the supreme impersonal self of us all.
The CPU might be called Brahman and your Thread called Atman.

I generally disagree with the dualist notion that a person's mind is made up of a physical part that is influenced by a spirit, and instead believe the mind can be understood with a purely physical explanation...
However, I do believe in the two levels of self -- the lower-self that we identify with on a day-to-day basis, and the higher-self that is an impatial observer at our core or 'soul'. I also feel that all of these souls/threads/atman are all fractured views of the one god/CPU/brahman.
...which means, that yes, although the statement "I am not him" is true when talking about the lower self, it is false when talking about the higher-self. My atman is connected to your atman, and at some other point, I am your atman. So any acts that affect you now, also affect me at some other point.

@Promit - The point of this isn't to be an irrational pompous sophisticate making stuff up, it's about altering your world view to make your life and the world a little bit better. The motto of philosophy and religion both should be "Life is shit, how can we be happy anyway?".
The Buddha quote of "life is suffering" is actually a bad translation -- a more accurate translation IMO would be "life is a ride on a wagon with one bumpy wheel, so bring a cushion and deal with it!".

^Oberon_Command defined it the best. I'm editing my original post.

I minored in philosophy. I like the wikipedia definition of it, that being "A love of wisdom". I don't think everyone has an interest in deep philosophical thought or, maybe situational context matters.

I've spent a considerable amount of time thinking about stuff and found answers which I'm satisfied with. There are still a ton of questions I don't know the answers to, like "why does something exist rather than nothing?" (though, if nothing existed, then there wouldn't be something to ask that question so its only a problem if something exists...)
I suppose quite a few philosophers have done quite a bit or work in attempting to answer deep philosophical questions, so there's a good chance that someone else has already wondered whatever you're wondering and wrote a reasoned answer about it. The interesting parts of philosophy are where there are disagreements (someone is wrong, its either you or them).

I don't think that my mind is capable to understand the tiniest bit of this whole shit, so I stopped bothering, and that's my philosophy. In reality I realised that I'm stupid, not in some philosophical sense, but in the most everyday sense. I'm thinking like a new-age women's magazine and all I can do is feeling that there are flaws in other's thinking and in every philosophy/theories I encountered, but I am never able to tell why and really what the flaw is.

So yeah, politics and world-saving bullshit (and chiding women) are my new conversation topics. And chiding whiners, I love that.