A fine example of this is shown by the overwhelming majority of Americans not trusting that the country is heading in the right direction, by virtue of not trusting the truthfulness of elected officials, and most recently, not trusting the very institutions of American government. — creativesoul

Unfortunately, one political party--the GOP--is deliberately fomenting doubt.

The best time is always the first time. — ssu

Not really. Now Trump has the entire GOP behind him.

Hence no "American Revolution" happened that day. — ssu

Coup attempts are usually tried a second time. The planning is taking place now.

Because that's what philosophy is for. — baker

Religion is philosophy? Do you think art is engineering?

The laws of physics is the way the old determinists understood the physical universe.

People like Schrodinger said science only describes ranges of behaviors of physical particles or events.

Laziness, pressed for time, forgetfulness, and a host of other benign reasons. Ideas also tend to recirculate in the population - multiple discoveries (re the Newton-Leibniz calculus controversy). — Agent Smith

Not about common ideas. Pretty straightforward. If you quote someone, cite the source.

The point of citing one's sources is primarily to mitigate/prevent the despicable act of plagiarism — Agent Smith

Yes. If you quote someone, you have to cite the source. Not sure why this is such a troubling idea for some.

Only that if there’s no free will, there’s nothing to discuss, because the outcome of any discussion is already predetermined, so it’s not worth having. — Wayfarer

Yes. I never really understood the arguments around free will.

However, many Christians are homeschooling because they do not like what is happening in public schools. — Athena

Aren't Christians homeschooling because they are very conservative and are scared of liberalism?

Well, a religion which one can profess and yet disregard so blithely, as most Christians do, is bound to be popular. — Ciceronianus

It is whatever you want it to be.

Does those who believe admit they know it is not true?

Bye.

So you turned this into a religion forum. Do you post on religion forums about epistemology?

Yeah, you said. But it's not stealing Hilary's emails he's going to be charged with, but exposing war crimes of The US. — unenlightened

I really do not care anymore.

Uh huh, so I wasn't wrong the first time then. — Isaac

I completely agree with your assessment.

I don't much like the guy either. But It's really bad news for any kind of freedom of speech reporting of truth and exposure of high crimes and misdemeanours, and rank hypocrisy on the part of US and UK governments. And there is nothing much to discuss on that front. — unenlightened

Assange was helping the Russian government and Trump exchange information from stolen emails from Hillary Clinton and the DNC. No sympathy for the guy.

Why do people come to a philosophy forum to talk about religion?

How is Russia!
Murders and rapists walk away with a few months, and someone exposing shitty government secrets that endangers the population are threated like Hitler.
It’s ironic that the "free" world and the "open" society are going to torture Julian Assange in part for exposing documents about torturing people.
The UK government just officially sanctioned somebody to literal fucking torture. Don't let this hypocrisy be forgotten whenever the UK government claims to care about human rights. Christ.
In Devil we trust.
Discuss, ladies and gentlemen. — gikehef947

Hard to care about the guy. He wanted to help Trump get elected.

Sorry but I detest Nietszche. I know I don't understand him well but nothing I've seen makes me want to understand him any better. — Wayfarer

What exactly do you object to?

That would be practical if it had a name, given the number of times I want to point it out in people I talk to… — Skalidris

Not sure what phenomenon you are referring to. Sounds like skepticism.

So experience, not necessarily matter, defines empiricism. That we experience matter (ie all of our experiences thus far are directly attributable to matter) is empirical evidence for materialism. — Isaac

We don't experience matter. I do not even know what that means.

What's with all the religions threads recently?

There is empirical evidence for materialism. — Isaac

Isn't materialism what empiricism is defined by?

Agreeing with you, that's it.

one can feel certain that God exists — Janus

A statement of belief.

but one cannot be certain, i.e. know. that God exists. — Janus

Knowledge of object.

I think you are referring to Hubert Dreyfus' work, not the American actor from Close Encounters. — Tom Storm

I was hoping it was Richard.

I know more about Greeks than you. But, you refuse discussion, so we are done.

my own madness has an eventual method when I allow me to get there — Moliere

Sounds good!

the more I look into ancient Greek culture and philosophy and literature the grosser it becomes. — Moses

For example?

Nietzsche as naturalist, which I'm not sure I'd agree with that statement. — Moliere

Yes, many analytic philosophers are doing this reading of Nietzsche as a naturalist. Similar to those doing a non-metaphysical reading of Hegel.

Goodbye.

Accurate.

Goodbye.

You are the least informed person on this forum. Always.

Sorry, not getting your point.

The wedding of two monads: m+m=m — jgill

Monads do not affect others like efficient cause.

Hi, I am preparing my post-graduate entrance examination(philosophy), after I read the Chinese version of medieval philosophy of religion, our textbooks tend to explain the birth of Christianity in terms of class struggle, but I wanted to know the subtle reasons why people chose Christianity over other religions in the first place. — guanyun

Because they are taught it as children.

A dog is an animal. A cat is an animal. Hence a dog is a cat. — Banno

Silly.

The SEP begs to differ:

"Since there is a hierarchy among monads within any animal, from the soul of a person down to the infinitely small monad, the relation of domination and subordination among monads is a crucial feature of both Leibniz's idealism and his panorganicism. But the hierarchy of substances is not simply one of containment, in which one monad has an organic body which is the result of other monads, each of which has an organic body, and so on. In the case of animals (brutes and human beings), the hierarchy of monads is also related to the control of the “machine of nature” (as Leibniz had put it in a letter to De Volder considered above). What is it then that explains the relation of dominant and subordinate monads? As Leibniz tells Des Bosses, domination and subordination consists of degrees of perfection." — ZzzoneiroCosm

That said nothing. Remember, Leibniz invented the calculus. He is talking about symbolic relations.

A possible world is a logic of relations. A monad is a logic of relations. If you understand Leibniz, you know this is true.