Komentar untuk sEeM aRt http://seemart.wordpress.com "___virtual documentation centre___" Mon, 15 Dec 2008 15:56:10 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Komentar di Manusia Menurut Driyarkara oleh seemart http://seemart.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/manusia-menurut-driyarkara/#comment-49 seemart Mon, 15 Dec 2008 15:56:10 +0000 http://seemart.wordpress.com/?p=166#comment-49 sama2..semoga blog ini bermanfaat bagi kehidupan regards moderator sama2..semoga blog ini bermanfaat bagi kehidupan

regards
moderator

]]> Komentar di Manusia Menurut Driyarkara oleh kumpulan puisi http://seemart.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/manusia-menurut-driyarkara/#comment-48 kumpulan puisi Thu, 30 Oct 2008 05:46:05 +0000 http://seemart.wordpress.com/?p=166#comment-48 terimakasih atas referensi diatas... tugasnya biar cepat selesai terimakasih atas referensi diatas… tugasnya biar cepat selesai

]]> Komentar di Foucault dan Posmodernisme oleh awen http://seemart.wordpress.com/2008/07/28/foucault-dan-posmodernisme/#comment-37 awen Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:33:00 +0000 http://seemart.wordpress.com/?p=124#comment-37 apa yang ingin dikritik foucault adalah dialektika hegel yang mewarnai hampir seluruh pemikiran modern. Dialektika bagi foucault tidak mungkin....what is dialektika..? apa yang ingin dikritik foucault adalah dialektika hegel yang mewarnai hampir seluruh pemikiran modern. Dialektika bagi foucault tidak mungkin….what is dialektika..?

]]> Komentar di Existentialism: An Introduction oleh wong http://seemart.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/existentialism-an-introduction/#comment-36 wong Tue, 12 Aug 2008 02:52:08 +0000 http://seemart.wordpress.com/?p=170#comment-36 existencialism introduction bro :) many philosophers talked bout existencialism philosophy.their philosophy are different. show us bout ur contradict...:) logical analysis? existencialism introduction bro :)
many philosophers talked bout existencialism philosophy.their philosophy are different. show us bout ur contradict…:) logical analysis?

]]> Komentar di Existentialism: An Introduction oleh Rick http://seemart.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/existentialism-an-introduction/#comment-29 Rick Fri, 08 Aug 2008 22:45:09 +0000 http://seemart.wordpress.com/?p=170#comment-29 I don't know where you are -what existentialism is not. I don't know alot about this philosophy, but what I know seems to contradict everything you said. I don’t know where you are -what existentialism is not. I don’t know alot about this philosophy, but what I know seems to contradict everything you said.

]]> Komentar di What is Individualism? oleh Tony Romo http://seemart.wordpress.com/2008/06/02/what-is-individualism/#comment-15 Tony Romo Tue, 24 Jun 2008 06:09:00 +0000 http://seemart.wordpress.com/?p=89#comment-15 I disagree with you with on Altruism. I think you gave a poor example of what altruism is by using a materialistic angle as far as giving everything you have while equating it to sacrifice. You also assumed that such specific acts constitute altruism, regardless of the reaction or impact it has on the RECIEVER. Such an assumption by the giver would actually fall into egoism, because it would suggest that the act itself is more valuable than the thought and response. What defines altruism other than the act, thought process, AND feedback? Will doing “everything” for the OTHER truly mean you are HELPING the other? That is the point, is it not? To help? If both giver and receiver are altruistic, according to your theory, then the boy who was offered the $50,000 from the grocery bagger isn’t possible, because he too would be concerned, for the grocery bagger’s loans, debts, and hard work put into the “altruistic” gesture and would not accept such a SACRIFICE for his own. Altruism is a selfless move defined by the OTHER. Merriam-webster's dictionary states altruism is an unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others. If a piece of advice, void of materialistic value is the best thing you ever received, would you qualify the giver as not altruistic enough because he didn’t give everything else he had, regardless if it was valuable to YOU or not? Did the father who gave his son a fishing pole instead of fish for him fall short of altruism because he knew that such knowledge would serve his son far more valuable and serve him forever instead of the temporary satisfaction of catching the fish for him? You are superimposing your own perspective of altruism on the actual definition and suggesting that a $5 dollar donation to a homeless man isn't enough "sacrifice". Your theory suggests you aren't altruistic ENOUGH. You must give that person your house, car, savings account and job leaving you broke on the street while the once poor guy is now in your shoes and UNTIL then, it will qualify as an act of no benefit to yourself. Do you think the homeless guy himself doesn't possess an ounce of altruism and wouldnt feel bad?You think the homeless guy would take it all? If he did, wouldn't you say he's selfish? If you say to this, "well that is going overboard", then you are now picking and choosing what should be sacrificed-at what amount and what shouldn’t. Even altruism has its own balances and paradoxes; you have to find the middle ground. Ok enough analogies and stories, I agree with you that there is definite confusion with the term because people like me, those you talk about and yourself add to the numerous "confusion" perspectives altruism stands for. This is not to say your perspective is wrong, confusion isn't necessarily wrong either, but your point of view is subjective, according to my point of view and it would do justice to view altruism in the realm of a giver and receiver perspective rather than what is defined by the “individual” giver. Kind of ironic huh? Thank you for reading this post. Hope to hear your opinion. I disagree with you with on Altruism. I think you gave a poor example of what altruism is by using a materialistic angle as far as giving everything you have while equating it to sacrifice. You also assumed that such specific acts constitute altruism, regardless of the reaction or impact it has on the RECIEVER. Such an assumption by the giver would actually fall into egoism, because it would suggest that the act itself is more valuable than the thought and response. What defines altruism other than the act, thought process, AND feedback? Will doing “everything” for the OTHER truly mean you are HELPING the other? That is the point, is it not? To help? If both giver and receiver are altruistic, according to your theory, then the boy who was offered the $50,000 from the grocery bagger isn’t possible, because he too would be concerned, for the grocery bagger’s loans, debts, and hard work put into the “altruistic” gesture and would not accept such a SACRIFICE for his own. Altruism is a selfless move defined by the OTHER. Merriam-webster’s dictionary states altruism is an unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others. If a piece of advice, void of materialistic value is the best thing you ever received, would you qualify the giver as not altruistic enough because he didn’t give everything else he had, regardless if it was valuable to YOU or not? Did the father who gave his son a fishing pole instead of fish for him fall short of altruism because he knew that such knowledge would serve his son far more valuable and serve him forever instead of the temporary satisfaction of catching the fish for him? You are superimposing your own perspective of altruism on the actual definition and suggesting that a $5 dollar donation to a homeless man isn’t enough “sacrifice”. Your theory suggests you aren’t altruistic ENOUGH. You must give that person your house, car, savings account and job leaving you broke on the street while the once poor guy is now in your shoes and UNTIL then, it will qualify as an act of no benefit to yourself. Do you think the homeless guy himself doesn’t possess an ounce of altruism and wouldnt feel bad?You think the homeless guy would take it all? If he did, wouldn’t you say he’s selfish? If you say to this, “well that is going overboard”, then you are now picking and choosing what should be sacrificed-at what amount and what shouldn’t. Even altruism has its own balances and paradoxes; you have to find the middle ground. Ok enough analogies and stories, I agree with you that there is definite confusion with the term because people like me, those you talk about and yourself add to the numerous “confusion” perspectives altruism stands for. This is not to say your perspective is wrong, confusion isn’t necessarily wrong either, but your point of view is subjective, according to my point of view and it would do justice to view altruism in the realm of a giver and receiver perspective rather than what is defined by the “individual” giver. Kind of ironic huh? Thank you for reading this post. Hope to hear your opinion.

]]> Komentar di Sartre vs. Nietzsche: Will To Power, Platonism, and Pessimism oleh Mandala http://seemart.wordpress.com/2008/06/09/sartre-vs-nietzsche-will-to-power-platonism-and-pessimism/#comment-12 Mandala Sun, 15 Jun 2008 11:21:06 +0000 http://seemart.wordpress.com/?p=108#comment-12 I like Nietzsche because he has killed our God So no one watching us anymore... freedom life!!! I like Nietzsche because he has killed our God
So no one watching us anymore… freedom life!!!

]]> Komentar di what is liberalism? oleh honestdebate http://seemart.wordpress.com/2008/06/02/what-is-liberalism/#comment-9 honestdebate Mon, 02 Jun 2008 12:39:56 +0000 http://seemart.wordpress.com/?p=82#comment-9 interesting, but isn't self-interest a consequence of freedom or liberalism... and where self-interest dictate behavior, truth and morality are often the price. i'm believe that one man's freedom is another man's slavery. liberalism brings with it a whole host of problems does it not? interesting, but isn’t self-interest a consequence of freedom or liberalism… and where self-interest dictate behavior, truth and morality are often the price.

i’m believe that one man’s freedom is another man’s slavery. liberalism brings with it a whole host of problems does it not?

]]> Komentar di Geography and Mapping oleh felkis http://seemart.wordpress.com/2008/05/29/geography-and-mapping/#comment-3 felkis Fri, 30 May 2008 02:04:50 +0000 http://seemart.wordpress.com/2008/05/29/geography-and-mapping/#comment-3 Hello... I liked very much your site! It has some nice information and great historic maps! I´ll add your blog to my favorites =] Hello…
I liked very much your site! It has some nice information and great historic maps!
I´ll add your blog to my favorites =]

]]>