Guest Lesmore Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 noun (plural philosophies) 1 [mass noun] the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline. See also natural philosophy [count noun] a particular system of philosophical thought: the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle the study of the theoretical basis of a particular branch of knowledge or experience: the philosophy of science 2 a theory or attitude that acts as a guiding principle for behaviour: Wow....this was the OP. So far I've seen a whole lot of questions that WEREN"T ASKED commented on. I've also seen a lot of questioning and opinions given on other poster's Philosophies. I was under the impression everyone is entitled to their own thoughts and beliefs. No where in the OP do I see how a critique of BF philosophies was asked for. Philosophy is the study of something...the original question was refering to how we as individuals approach the "Study of Bigfoot", or actually just "Study Bigfoot" Not what we think of how others proceed in the endevor. Just my 2 cents. It was meant to be a rather loose, open ended opportunity to individuals .....to provide a forum to express their view regarding BF. As such, I anticipated a wide range of views, personal philosophies and that's what happened, continues to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Bipedalist- I'm not suggesting we consider Bigfoot a paranormal entity, such as an interdimensional creature or a shapeshifter. It either exist as a real flesh and blood animal or else it does not exist and the phenomena is an expression of contemporary folklore. We are talking philosophy here, and I am suggesting we be open to considering an anomalous ape, at one end of the spectrum of possibilities, and the possibility of its existence as a cultural myth at the other end of possible solutions to the phenomena. Some who read and/or post at BFF may see a third way, a more mystical and less natural explanation for Bigfoot. Personally, that option has no appeal. Jodie- I never met my granduncle. However, my wonderful, down to earth grandmother swore she believed her brother's sighting. She related to me that her brother served in WW1. On a transport ship in the Mediterranean Sea, he observed from a distance a beached mermaid. He told of observing the fish/maid slowly combing her long golden hair. From the waist down, she had a fish's body. From the waist up, the body and face of a beautiful woman. Now, do I believe the account? No. Did he really believe what he told his family, after the war? I do not know. Did he make up the story? Don't know. Was he hoaxed? Don't know. Was he a liar, or crazy? Don't know. The reason I included the sighting account is because my grandmother believed her brother. She was totally unshaken in her belief that mermaids exist; she knew they existed because her brother told her so, because he saw one. Sound familiar. There seems to be unbridled animosity in Bigfooter land. Advocates seem to always bemoan the alleged "scofticism" of skeptics and establishment science.. Bigfooters of all stripes seem to be put off by other Bigfooter opinions on a host of issues. Professional Bigfooters deem other professional Bigfooters unsavory or unworthy. Where does all this come from? I think the phenomena itself causes anxiety (as well as enchantment). Why? Because the phenomena seems to be very straightforward. There exists in the country's hinterland a species of an immensely large ape (or a race of relic human). Given the thousands of sightings all across the country, the films/videos, the tracks, and so on, we believe we know they exist. Yet, there is no hard documentation for the existence of such creatures. And there should be. So, unlike a real natural mystery, the Bigfoot phenomena looks more and more like ghost phenomena, or like werewolf accounts, or mermaid on the beach stories-----always with us, yet always, always, unverifiable. No wonder Bigfooters are unhappy with each other. We are driven to a mild madness by the emotions of enchantment in belief, and disappointment in real world results. (Thanks Cervelo). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 And once again Jerry you have put into words exactly my position well done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ShadowPrime Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 (edited) If I had to define my "philosophy" on BF, I think I would say I am openminded, cautious, intrigued, and INCLINED to think BF is indeed "out there", a flesh and blood creature. I understand, and can articulate, objections to that belief (and not using the word "belief" in the context of "something thought to be true based purely on faith"... just saying!), and I am all for healthy, honest skepticism. In fact, I think that is essential. One thing I find so refreshing - and which might surprise some who aren't "into" BF - is that places like this are, IMHO, robustly skeptical. Someone trotting out a clumsy hoax video is NOT going to find it easy going around here... which is, I think, a good thing. Why do some folks have such a hard time with "skeptics"? Well, I think there many different kinds of skeptics - or folks who call themselves "skeptics". Just as some people have decided BF is real and will brook no suggestion to the contrary, there are some who have decided BF CANNOT be real, and will brook no suggestion in the other direction. To me, this latter group is not truly "skeptical". There is a difference between saying "I don't believe there is enough evidence to make the case for BF" and saying "BF definitely cannot be out there". The first group could, in theory, change views based on new evidence, events, etc. The latter group - short of a body, not so much. Just saying. I think it is THAT latter group that inspires a lot of the friction. IMHO. They are, I think, less fairly described as "skepticaL" as "decided". Along those lines - and since we were asked to discuss our "philosophy"! - all I am looking for is for the subject to be taken seriously, versus it being a target of derision and snickering, in the media and in the scientific community. Don't get me wrong... I don't offer that in some insecure, self-pitying way. REALLY! I MEAN IT! ;-) On one level, I honestly don't care... if my interest in BF was predicated on news anchors and scientists treating the subject with respect, I'd have moved on long ago. What I am saying is that, for me, there is a difference between saying "There is enough out there to PROVE BF is real" (I don't think that is the case, respectfully, today) and saying "I think there is enough out there that the SUBJECT is worthy of serious consideration" . I do - again, respectfully! - think that the latter IS the case. Shadow Edited March 26, 2011 by ShadowPrime 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Jodie- I never met my granduncle. However, my wonderful, down to earth grandmother swore she believed her brother's sighting. She related to me that her brother served in WW1. On a transport ship in the Mediterranean Sea, he observed from a distance a beached mermaid. He told of observing the fish/maid slowly combing her long golden hair. From the waist down, she had a fish's body. From the waist up, the body and face of a beautiful woman. Now, do I believe the account? No. Did he really believe what he told his family, after the war? I do not know. Did he make up the story? Don't know. Was he hoaxed? Don't know. Was he a liar, or crazy? Don't know. The reason I included the sighting account is because my grandmother believed her brother. She was totally unshaken in her belief that mermaids exist; she knew they existed because her brother told her so, because he saw one. Sound familiar. That is just amazing!!!! Regardless of what your personal feelings are I think it is fascinating. I collect mermaid sightings. I'll PM you and tell you why because it is unrelated to the thread if you are interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 (edited) There seems to be unbridled animosity in Bigfooter land. Advocates seem to always bemoan the alleged "scofticism" of skeptics and establishment science.. Bigfooters of all stripes seem to be put off by other Bigfooter opinions on a host of issues. Professional Bigfooters deem other professional Bigfooters unsavory or unworthy. Where does all this come from? Human nature. Show me an issue filled with love, unity, and universal consensus. Edited March 26, 2011 by masterbarber removed unacceptable content Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 JC, I "know" that they're difficult to find. Chris B. Just go look around Sasfooty's property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knuck Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Just go look around Sasfooty's property. Hey what about mine? lol -Knuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 I am not interested in more philosophy regarding Bigfoot. 40 years of it is enough. I am more interested in what someone KNOWS about Bigfoot. No one knows anything. Sadly, That is true. But I have hope. There are many new reports being made today then there ever has been. I'm thinking that regular people are not as embarrassed to admit to a BF sighting as in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 I think.. the only people who know are the ones that know. You know ? I like that thing.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lesmore Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 I1, I preferred your previous avatar. You know...the one featuring Uma Thurman as the nurse in Kill Bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 My philosophy, or at least what I believe about the bigfoot conundrum: I'm squarely transfixed upon the horns of the veritable dilemma. Too many reliable witnesses for too many generations report credible sightings. There's simply no way to deny those sightings with the wave of a hand. Yet the lack of physical evidence is troubling, to say the least. If folks are witnessing a large, bipedal, hairy creature, it simply must leave evidence of its existence. Yet, there's nothing to stake a claim upon. I'm in the camp that extends the belief the creature probably exists. A romantic, rebel portion of my personality wants to see the creature exists. The logical, calculating portion of my mind wrestles with the fact so many credible reports have come for so many generations, yet there's not a wisp of physical evidence to prove such. So I'm reduced to the assumption that the creature exists in remarkably small number, that perhaps they're on the verge of extinction. I have no other explanation. Such is my philosophy on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 I preferred your previous avatar. You know...the one featuring Uma Thurman as the nurse in Kill Bill. Welcome to the Club. Opening cut of Joe's 1975 album. It's killer. My previous avatar actually featured the scrumptious Daryl Hannah, from Kill Bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 (edited) I'd throw this into the mix... JerryWayne- your very well written discussion of flesh and blood existence =vs= expression of mythological/contemporary folklore is great when your approaching the subject as a discussion by those who dont claim to have had a sighting/encounter. And while I am more than extremely passionate about my belief that they exist, I am willing to concede that at least a portion, maybe even a goodly portion of the reports/stories are fictitious... Why ? people want to be part of the club, they're bored, few cards short of full deck- who knows. So far at this point of my time here at BFF, I have chosen to share my experiences that happened to me as a young man with maybe 4 or 5 members... that I chose and it was done via private messages. I like some, and unlike others have up until now, chosen not to publicly put myself out there and make a claim that I have seen an animal/creature/ being in my lifetime that many simply believe does not exist. I can tell you this- when i was 13 years old- I lived in the middle of no-where in the Catskill Mtns in NY. I had very limited exposure to TV, and the outside world as a child. I had never heard of BF, Sasquatch, Yeti- or any other name you want to call it when I saw what I saw. No one can try to tell me that I saw something common and applied "an expression of contemporary folklore" to it. I struggled for several years after it happened, being especially afraid because it was a complete "unknown". It wasnt until years later that I saw something on TV that put a name to it, and gave me a reference point knowing that there were other people who claimed to have seen same/similar thing that I saw. And yes of course I know and admit that aside from having a picture, DNA, or some other verifiable evidence, that my experiences just get added to the thousands of other "stories" that are out there- but it doesnt make it any less believable to me. I may never get closure and validation to ease the turmoil that's in its own little folder in my mind, and has been festering there for the last 25 years, but that's ok because I know it happened... I've never tried to profit from the experience,never bragged or boasted about it, inf fact up until very recently you couldnt pry it out of me with a crowbar. As a result of those experiences, I've had a lifelong interest in anything to do with the subject, and I suppose it will be that way even after (if) some iron clad evidence is found. I just wanted to put my thoughts out there on your post- which I thought was really excellently written.... Art Edited March 27, 2011 by Art1972 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masterbarber Posted March 27, 2011 Admin Share Posted March 27, 2011 Several recent posts were removed for trolling, personal attacks and at least one snide comment intended to bait another member. You know who you are, so understand that any further continuation of this activity will result in warning level increases to each of your accounts. If you need clarification then send a pm. Please continue the discussion in a respectful manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts