Yeah I don’t much care if that was original to Manson or Hillel or Gandhi … it’s pretty inane and trite.
I can see why Manson would glom onto it though.
Yes, slavery is another good example. The way to approach ideas like Manson’s quote, and the Seers stuff from the other thread, is to nail down the emotive words (ie freedom or defect) to a proper definition. Once you’ve done that, watch for equivocation Equivocation - Wikipedia and don’t let them get away with it.
Regarding dismissing “crazy” people, imagine if someone says something clearly illogical 1000 times. Why should you listen the 1001st time? You could, but in the age of the internet, you could spend the rest of your life reading peoples thoughts on the human condition. Recognising this, people are right to be choosy about who they spend their time reading. There will be far more nuanced writing on how our mental health or imaginations can limit our lives than this Manson quote, and far more nuanced writing on the effect of mental illness on humanity as a whole than that Seer writing. What these two have in common is that they’re trying to draw very broad conclusions about the whole of humanity using emotive language. If you take the approach I’ve mentioned of making concrete definitions out of emotive terms, you’ll find that their claims tend to fall away. This approach should make it easier for you to evaluate this kind of writing.
What about the most recent link that I posted above?
But in all these “truth” pages they just like to use appeals to emotion with charged words. They quotes they use are usually not in the right context. Not to mention they twist the meaning of words to suit their own agenda. The “seer” does it a lot.
It’s hard to shake the fact that someone might be in on some big secret and you aren’t .
But I suppose there is some truth to what you say. It’s not the phrase that gets me, it’s the person who said it. I grinds me for some reason a psychotic killer could be right about something in the lives of normal people, even if it’s not an original concept. I guess you could say it clashes with an image I have in my head of such people.
Although one shouldn’t take life advice from them in either way.
Yeah, about that. Sorry, but I’ve been sworn to secrecy?
That’s not what I’m getting at. I just don’t know how people can blow this off so easily despite the fallacy.
Therein lies your problem. You focus on the wrong things to the point of obsessing about trivialities and miss the point that life is not just one thing or, more accurately in your case - what the last thing you heard or read someone say about life.
You’re too busy navel gazing and analyzing instead of living.
Perhaps you need to work on dealing with your obsessive thinking behaviour, rather than continuing to obsess about what someone else thinks is the meaning of it life. There is nothing new under the sun. Everything anybody has ever said that was even remotely clever or insightful about the human condition is either dead or dying. If you continue to obsess, you’re going to come to regret never having lived a life worth examining.
This. I’m not in a prison, either. I have a job I love working with people I like and respect, a couple of spoiled cats who love me and are adorable, a cute condo with space for a little garden on the patio, and nice parental units and cousins. My intended died suddenly some years back, but I will no doubt meet another wonderful man who I enjoy spending time with. I can access all kinds of things to amuse myself with if I want to avoid doing chores (which happens more than I like to admit! 
).
I’m really fortunate to have the life I do, and I enjoy it. Well, except staff meetings. I’m not a fan of those.
So … uh … what you are saying is that our op is in his own prison, his own warden and doing his own time?
But that he does not have to be … or at least if he so chose he he could have a prison of any arbitrary size. (Like in that Phineas and Ferb episode where the alien imprisoned them and they goaded the alien to proving how powerful it was and how much it could imprison until all of the universe was contained on their side of the walls. :))
The pithiness of the “we create our own prisons; are our own wardens” line, whoever first coined it, is merely that many of our limitations and reactions are self-imposed and things that we need to take personal ownership of … and can do something about. Paying attention to the line just because some psychopathic killer said it (and twists into a plea to not judge him) is quite frankly a waste of time.
But isn’t now the point of all the naval gazing and analyzing in order to find the best way to live? Isn’t that what philosophy does? So if you are apparently in your own prison then you aren’t living a life worth examining. If you don’t get free then you’ll forever live in ignorance behind your walls. If a psychopath can say that, what does that mean about the rest of us? To avoid that analyzing seems to be living some kind of zombie like existence. Like being born dead.
I’m just pointing out the counters people have told me before about all this (I also added another link recently on this page of the thread). Isn’t the point of life to live free?
Why does life have to have a point?
No.
No.
Sorry but that seems like a nonsensical bit there.
Nothing at all. A psychopath can say 2+2=4 or that 2+2=a googleplex. Neither statement being made by the psychopath says anything about the rest of us. What would say something about the rest of us is if we bothered to listen just because it was a psychopath saying it.
Nah. Lots of ways to live satisfying and meaningful lives without analyzing it. And lots of ways that critical thinking including about the subjects covered in philosophy can enhance life.
Nah. I’m not free. I charge for my time. Well not right now.
Dude you have had threads upon threads with the well intended trying to explain what philosophy is and is not and what its point is and is not. I am not going repeat any of those threads. Others are free to.
So he could say something about the environment and it wouldn’t be special?
Got anyone else you want to quote about this subject(whatever it is)? I’m not going to participate in a sick “Wit And Wisdom of Charles Manson” thread that isn’t in The BBQ Pit.
Here’s some words on the topic from someone who knows even better:
I don’t understand, what does that have to do with I said?
I’m not trying to make him seem like some kind of wise man. I’m just trying to deal with the counters some might have to points against him.
At times like this, I am reminded of something Ulysses S. Grant said, not long after the battle of Vicksburg. He turned to an aide, and he said, “I’m really hungry.”
I just don’t get how people can ignore it, isn’t that confirmation bias?
Na ganna click on that link.
I do not care what Manson says about the environment. He could be saying something I completely agree with, something rational I disagree with, or something insane. Don’t matter. His being a psychopath does not imbue what he says about anything with being “special.” Why should I or you care what a psychopath thinks? Why should I or you pay any more attention to what he says than what the poor psychotic soul who has no services or resources and mutters as he wanders in the streets says? Why does Manson having been a murderous psychopath make his statements, whether they be sane ones or word salad, worth listening to over any other person’s? Short version: it does not.
Trinopus, a more common line uttered by Grant may be more apt: “I really need another drink.”