*sigh*. The more philosophy i do outside of this forum the less appealing smart-sounding, but un(der)regulated discussion becomes. — AmadeusD
Well, I think that the opportunity to discuss them with other people who have also read them helps a lot. That's my biggest problem. Perhaps I should try to start some reading groups.For the purpose of learning philosophy, time spent actually reading the classics is more productive than arguing with idiots in the hopes of the occasional informative post. — Lionino
I've been aware of some of them. I suppose I'll just have to experiment and see what happens.There are a few reading groups here — Wittgenstein, Aristotle, Kant, Descartes. But you don't see them unless you look for them because they get quickly taken over by dumb nonsense such as this and this. — Lionino
That suggests one could start a useful discussion from the relevant pages of the encyclopedias - and then read the book. Standing on the shoulders of the giants.Anyhow, any meaningful discussion to be had is covered 90% in the IEP/SEP page of the respective philosopher — Lionino
That seems paradoxical. — Ludwig V
+belief implies one is not certain — Ludwig V
I'm happy to assert that that is not the case — Ludwig V
But I would say that a belief must be capable of being true and most people think that religious doctrines are true or false. — Ludwig V
Here is a statement from a highly-regarded Catholic philosopher, Joseph Pieper, with whom I have only passing familiarity: — Wayfarer
moral virtues become deeply embedded in our character
links the knowing of truth to the condition of purity.
the virtues of faith, hope, and love
Well, I'm inclined to agree with you at least this far, that "I believe that p and that p is false" is a contradiction. "I believe that p and that p might be false" is not a flat-out contradiction, and could be described as paradoxical. "I believe that p and that p cannot be known, even though p is capable of truth and falsity." is extremely odd, but, for someone who believes on faith, comprehensible.I think claiming belief and not knowledge is paradoxical. The claim to 'faith' is, to me, an indication of dishonesty or delusion. — AmadeusD
That seems a reasonable idea. Maybe a bit harsh - people can be misled even if they do their level best to check things out properly.to me, delusion implies that someone has simply formed a conclusion without adequately assessing the relevant states of affairs. — AmadeusD
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.