Yet philosophers have done this sort of thing and become respectable. — jellyfish
To be perfect is to be unassailable, so it stands to reason that if you are being assailed then you are not perfect. — Mark Dennis
Weren't they already respectable when doing it, or did they become respectable later? — creativesoul
Just jesting with you... — creativesoul
I think of Russell and Wittgenstein. If you seduce the right somebody, you don't stay a nobody for long. Now I love me some Wittgenstein, but homeboy was a troll sometimes? — jellyfish
Troll? — creativesoul
That's the story I had in mind.Wittgenstein was invited to a meeting of the Vienna circle: “When he finally came, instead of answering their questions about his book, he sat facing away from them reading Tagore, the Indian poet, for over an hour and then got up and silently left the room. Afterward Carnap remarked to Schlick, “I guess he is not one of us.”
I do not wish to judge how far my efforts coincide with those of other philosophers. Indeed, what I have written here makes no claim to novelty in detail, and the reason why I give no sources is that it is a matter of indifference to me whether the thoughts that I have had have been anticipated by someone else. — W
The solution of the problem of life is seen in the vanishing of the
problem. (Is not this the reason why those who have found after a long
period of doubt that the sense of life became clear to them have then been
unable to say what constituted that sense?)
6.522 There are, indeed, things that cannot be put into words. They make
themselves manifest. They are what is mystical.
6.53 The correct method in philosophy would really be the following: to say
nothing except what can be said, i.e. propositions of natural science--i.e.
something that has nothing to do with philosophy -- and then, whenever
someone else wanted to say something metaphysical, to demonstrate to him
that he had failed to give a meaning to certain signs in his propositions.
Although it would not be satisfying to the other person--he would not have
the feeling that we were teaching him philosophy--this method would be the
only strictly correct one.
— W
Respectable does not equal well-known...
Does it? — creativesoul
Which is what Bakhtin's notion of dialogism does. Unfortunately, there are still a lot of monologists lurking about. — uncanni
It's as if every ideal or principle casts a shadow. It offers us a welcome refuge from the abyssal complexity within. Can any community exist without some foundational blindspot? I don't know. I guess I'm suspicious of any ideology, including my own anti-ideology, claiming a Final Triumph and mistakenly believing it has exiled its own madness. — jellyfish
When troll really makes it, no one calls him or her a troll anymore. Calling all the philosophy that came before a bunch of confusion, for instance, seems trollish. Yet philosophers have done this sort of thing and become respectable.
Does anyone else feel like a fair number of individuals on this site could do with some humility?
Are you constantly feeling angry when someone proves you wrong? Then watch this you cognitively dissonant masses you haha — Mark Dennis
While we may have differing views, cultures and backgrounds, let’s not forget we are here to increase our awareness, collaborate and seek knowledge. — Mark Dennis
To be perfect is to be unassailable, so it stands to reason that if you are being assailed then you are not perfect — Mark Dennis
If we here treat each other as ends and not means to ends then we can all benefit. — Mark Dennis
Can you elaborate / give examples? — Pfhorrest
...is being right the same as being perfect? — Mark Dennis
Also, I’d agree that one does not need to be known to be respectable. — Mark Dennis
Perfect knowledge is right. So, if one can be right and assailed, then it is not true that if one is being assailed one is not right(perfect).
That was the context...
A perfect answer given by a perfect person wouldn’t be assailed because everyone would know it was a perfect answer. — Mark Dennis
that was kind of implied by this, only perfect beings can recognise perfect answers or other perfect beings.you could also maybe make an argument that the perfect person can only be recognised as such by other perfect beings.
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.