I'm not confident enough to say that it's the purpose. — Moliere
Pantagruel might agree with Rabelais, seeing philosophy as serious play. — Banno
Rabelais has long been a favourite of mine. — Pantagruel
Mere vitriol in the place of discussion. — Banno
I think, rather, a context limits what is probable.A context limits what is possible. — apokrisis
What?So it is an apophatic cause.
This makes about as much sense as saying the living room floor I'm standing on "causes" me not to be standing on the living floor in the apartment below.It causes by suppressing what might otherwise be the case.
This makes about as much sense as saying the living room floor I'm standing on causes me not to be standing on the living floor below. — 180 Proof
I don't think it incoherent so much as incomplete. After all, why not do what is useful? But deciding what is useful presupposes other stuff. Choosing a screw driver over a hammer assumes a great deal about the task in hand. — Banno
I think, rather, a context limits what is probable. — 180 Proof
This makes about as much sense as saying the living room floor I'm standing on "causes" me not to be standing on the living floor below. — 180 Proof
Really? :chin:Pragmatism tends to avoid ethics, or attempt to subsume it into other areas - metaphysics and so on. — Banno
Maybe the problem is I'm not a possibilist (i.e. actualism as well as an probabilist (ergo fallibilism)) and do not "believe" "possibilities" (abstraction entities) are "caused".So maybe the problem here is that you believe in frequentist ensembles and other products of modal realism? This is the reductionist image fixed in your mind? — apokrisis
Well, I referred to your saying "I try to cover as much ground as humanly possible, philosophy, science, anthropology, sociology, political theory. To what end?" Why do you try do do all that? Esp. in so many different fields? You cannot get specialized in all of them, can you?
Look what happens to this place (TPF): it accepts all of the above and more. It's a garden cake. It lacks "personality". That's why there's chaos in here. This site should treat only philosophical subjects.
Besides, you mentioned that yourself: you included "philosophy" as a separate field in your list of your fields of interest. This is what TPF should do too. — Alkis Piskas
This is true. There are all kinds of "philosophies": a "philosophy" of reading and a "philosophy" of cooking. There are also personal "philosophies": e.g. a programmer's "philosophy" of programming. In fact, you can add anything you can think of to "'philosophy of".Yes, but philosophy, likewise, is an overarching field. Every field has its "philosophy" - philosophical anthropology, philosophy of science, etc. — Pantagruel
BTW, I just checked "subdisciplines of philosophy" --not a very popular subject in itself-- and I read: "the core subdisciplines of philosophy: epistemology (the theory of knowledge), metaphysics (the theory of being), logic (the theory of reason and inference), value theory (including ethics, politics and aesthetics) and the history of philosophy." (https://philosophy.ubc.ca/undergraduate/ba-philosophy/major/)Similarly, I personally feel that the subdisciplines of philosophy ultimately accrue to metaphysical questions at the limits of knowledge. — Pantagruel
Besides, I can't see how does all this apply to our subject. Which, we must not forget, talks about the "Philosophical Project", and which is something that remains still unexplained — Alkis Piskas
English is my second language and I am a professional translator. I have also graduated from an American college.you are a little bit hung up on finding citations for terminology ... maybe it is because English is not your first language, or because you are new to the field. — Pantagruel
For instance, about your "Philosophy Project". A description of which, BTW, never came, although I asked for it 3 times. So I have to conclude --and I'm sorry for that-- that you don't know yourself. — Alkis Piskas
There are all kinds of "philosophies": a "philosophy" of reading and a "philosophy" of cooking….
…Metaphysics, which you mentioned, is only one of the subdisciplines, so they cannot all "accrue to metaphysical questions". — Alkis Piskas
What would a philosophy of reading or cooking look like? I would suggest that it would take something everyday and seek to place it within a more abstracted view of being.
In general, it would be the meta-view.
So that for me is the meaning of metaphysics. — apokrisis
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.