My understanding is that he threw a bone, to let the dogs fight. The truth may emerge from the fight.Of course you don't see that here, to this guy. That's because my understanding, which I believe is correct, is that this guy didn't start a discussion on multiple issues, but was just using them as examples. — Sapientia
Yes his post isn't fair. He's throwing you a bone. He's challenging you. That's why it's insulting and derisive. He doesn't want to make a point himself - he wants YOU to make a point. He is merely putting words there in order to provoke you. But you shouldn't react violently to that, because it is an opportunity for you to showcase your understanding, and share your understanding with others. You're here to do philosophy afterwards, not to deny challenges, but to take them head-on.So you're accusing me of being an ass towards him. I think that that's unfair. I've been no more of an ass than he has. I mirrored his own terminology and attitude.
And his complaint in its entirety isn't fair, hence my criticism. He merely raised some interesting and arguable points, but he didn't go into detail. Yet you seem to expect only me (and not him) to do so. The burden doesn't work like that. — Sapientia
I didn't find Moore convincing at all for example. Wittgenstein in "On Certainty" sent Moore back to school.No, they're not hard to find. You must not have looked hard. Right of the cuff, G.E. Moore comes to mind, and there are plenty more realists and others who have made non-sceptical arguments along those lines. — Sapientia
Yes, what did I tell you? It's the bone. It's a challenge to prove it otherwise. Take it! Stop complaining that he's challenging you. He called philosophy a joke not because he believes it, but to outrage you, so that in your outrage you may show him the way.Laugh at their expense?! Don't try to twist this into something personal. It's about the position, not the person. Look at the title of this thread, for Christ's sake. He called philosophy an absolute joke, and said that scepticism has won, whereas I think that it's more the other way around. — Sapientia
When I'm thrown a bone, I bite it and prove my point. That's what a philosopher does - fights the good fight, and shows the way. What kind of a philosopher are you if you never fight?Tell that to the original poster, who you're clearly biased in favour of. — Sapientia
Yes I know. So what? Everyone knows what Banno said. There's nothing worthy or great about his comment. That was self-evident.The irony is that this is why Banno's point was a good one. You made a general claim that actually told us more about you. So did the original poster, except that he made a whole bunch of 'em. — Sapientia
Yes his post isn't fair. He's throwing you a bone. He's challenging you. That's why it's insulting and derisive. He doesn't want to make a point himself - he wants YOU to make a point. He is merely putting words there in order to provoke you. But you shouldn't react violently to that, because it is an opportunity for you to showcase your understanding, and share your understanding with others. You're here to do philosophy afterwards, not to deny challenges, but to take them head-on. — Agustino
didn't find Moore convincing at all for example. Wittgenstein in "On Certainty" sent Moore back to school. — Agustino
When I'm thrown a bone, I bite it and prove my point. That's what a philosopher does - fights the good fight, and shows the way. What kind of a philosopher are you if you never fight? — Agustino
Um... those five items are of vital importance. — lambda
If you don't know whether your cognitive faculties are reliable, whether you're dreaming, whether the people around you are conscious, whether you are truly morally responsible for your actions, or whether the walls of your room continue to exist when you're not experiencing them, then you are in a state of total intellectual paralysis. — lambda
"Let us not pretend to doubt in philosophy what we do not doubt in our hearts." — aletheist
Brevity has its benefits.Really some people, take Banno's comment, and even want to give it thumbs up. Is this for real? Like why should that deserve thumbs up? Is that a grand philosophical refutation or something? >:O Scoffing at those who disagree won't convince them otherwise. Neither will one-liners. — Agustino
And yet skepticism is a philosophy.Skepticism has won; by a rather large margin. — lambda
Here's a summary of the past 2000 years of philosophy:
- Philosophers are still unable to determine whether they're dreaming or not.
- Philosophers are still unable to provide a non-circular justification for the reliability of their cognitive faculties (senses, memory, reason, intuition, etc.)
- Philosophers still can't offer any reason to believe in free will.
- Philosophers still can't offer any reason to believe in the existence of other minds.
- Philosophers still can't offer any reason to believe in the existence of a mind-independent external world.
Philosophy has failed, miserably. Skepticism has won; by a rather large margin.
The absolute failure of philosophy is a great example of how unaided human reasoning leads to nothing but absurdity.
Why does anyone still continue to study this nonsense? — lambda
Well then, perhaps we're dreaming, perhaps there is no "external world," perhaps there are no "other minds," and perhaps there is no free will. And now, back to living.The absolute failure of philosophy is a great example of how unaided human reasoning leads to nothing but absurdity. — lambda
Philosophy has failed, miserably. Skepticism has won; by a rather large margin. — lambda
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.