You are very serious about these conversations, me, not so much. I am here to relax and enjoy other people's views. — synthesis
Science (like all knowledge) changes constantly, correct? Why should I take anything postulated out there seriously if it is only going to be dis-proven? — synthesis
What on earth is the matter with chatting over a beer that should be disparaged? — Bitter Crank
Temporally, absolutely, but, practically speaking, I think not. — synthesis
Number one, Dr. Skeptic understands that medical science (in many cases) will not only not get you to the correct diagnosis, but it will only serve to confuse the matter. — synthesis
There's a very old saying in medicine that you might have heard before, "If you listen closely enough to the patient, s/he will tell you EXACTLY what is wrong." — synthesis
I would contend that it is impossible to understand even the simplest of things (if for no other reason than each event is preceded by an infinite number of events determining such. — synthesis
How you possibly understand the true nature of anything? — synthesis
Reality is not like the movie our brains convey. — synthesis
Again, Absolute Truth exists outside of the intellect. It is permanent and unchanging. Relative truth is impermanent (in constant flux). Although all knowledge is indeed relative, the left got it wrong (imagine that!) by refusing to acknowledge that although truth is relative, human beings still agree to live by it (a moral code) just the same. — synthesis
This is a treatment that a professional psychologist devised — baker
I want to figure out how to best guard against them when they are used against me. — baker
The "post modernists" aren't against truth. Indeed, the favourite targets of the right are all about the truth: the various objective states the world and society takes. They just recognise the objective states are a contingent formation: a truth put there by moment of existence, rather than something put there by a transcendent force or derived from a concept or principle. — TheWillowOfDarkness
The world isn't black and white. Thinking that it is is only limiting your options and your freedoms. I'm not the one seeing the world in black and white. You are. Pathetic.Both sides are the problem, said the guy who paints people he disagrees with as pawns and pretending he isn't one himself. So we have non-pawns and pawns, and within pawns there's whatever you're alluding to on two opposing sides as well. Yawn. — Benkei
You don't seem able to follow the argument, and engage in actual debate. Everything you say is mere contradiction. So, believe whatever you like. It doesn't matter anymore. Humankind is surely doomed - because, like you, they're wrong, and what is wrong cannot survive. It's cause and effect. — counterpunch
You are very serious about these conversations, me, not so much. I am here to relax and enjoy other people's views.
— synthesis
Again, seriousness has little to do with it. Even if I considered these conversations to be the most trivial matters in the world, the opinions I express in them would still have causes, and where empirical, would relate to evidence from experience.
I can't see what is so 'friendly' about claiming that BLM doctored the mobile phone footage of an arrest to make it look like murder, which then suddenly becomes fusty and academic when the actual source of that claim is added. — Isaac
What I am saying might make more sense to you in ten or fifteen years. — synthesis
I know I come from a very different place, but isn't that good? — synthesis
Give me an example of something I should take as a "given" in your world. — synthesis
Number one, Dr. Skeptic understands that medical science (in many cases) will not only not get you to the correct diagnosis, but it will only serve to confuse the matter.
— synthesis
How does Dr. Skeptic know that? What methods does he have access to that medical science does not?
He knows through his experience, i.e., he has followed the SOC (standard of care) many, many times which has left him wanting.
— Echarmion
There's a very old saying in medicine that you might have heard before, "If you listen closely enough to the patient, s/he will tell you EXACTLY what is wrong."
— synthesis
But isn't that also what "standard" medicine does? Only that they do not just listen to you talk, but also "listen" to various other bodily functions?
Well, that's the theory (just like the theory is that politicians act in their constituency's best interests). But you have to really listen and this takes time and, as well, being able to tap into what the person is saying.
Most providers do not have the time nor are they particularly interested in tapping into anything other then getting what needs to be done in order to satisfy TPTB which exert draconian control over the process.
— Echarmion
I would contend that it is impossible to understand even the simplest of things (if for no other reason than each event is preceded by an infinite number of events determining such.
— synthesis
So, if you want to boil a pot of water, do you randomly do things to it until it boils? Pray to the gods to boil the water? Or do you use your understanding of physics to predict what course of events will make the water boil?
Boiling water has as much to do with understanding as does a dung beetle's need to understand in order to perform its vital duty.
— Echarmion
How you possibly understand the true nature of anything?
— synthesis
How did the "true nature" of anything get into this discussion? What's a "true nature"? Why does it matter?
True nature is sort of a non-intellectual idea (I know). I've always kind of thought of understand as follows...it's not what you can understand that's important, but what you cannot understand that means everything.
— Echarmion
Reality is not like the movie our brains convey.
— synthesis
How do you know? If you don't think we have access to reality, you cannot make claims about it.
I don't. I prefer to think of life as discrete moments (outside of time), albeit connected.
Again, Absolute Truth exists outside of the intellect. It is permanent and unchanging. Relative truth is impermanent (in constant flux). Although all knowledge is indeed relative, the left got it wrong (imagine that!) by refusing to acknowledge that although truth is relative, human beings still agree to live by it (a moral code) just the same.
— synthesis
How is this epistemological position either left or right? — Echarmion
Why? What good would that do me?Even better, you could figure out how best to recognise them when you use them against others. — Kenosha Kid
Actually, I'm undecided on most things.:p It's both a blessing and a curse.I think most biases are revealed to us by trusting others' contrary experience.
Why? What good would that do me? — baker
Since I don't hold any position of power, it's irrelevant what biases I may hold in regard to others, as long as those biases aren't to my disadvantage. — baker
I don't understand why nobody in this thread can accept that this forum doesn't fall on the exact midpoint between Brett's political views and whatever liberal views he had in mind when he made this thread. It should be obvious. — Garth
Then what are we arguing about? — Garth
Were your girlfriends who were accosted by men when they were alone? Excatly.Everyone's in a position of power all the time. — Kenosha Kid
What exactly are we talking about? Do you think I'm a right-winger?Likewise, we can help people we love better if we are unbiased against the particular challenges they face.
Good morning to you, too!I remember my (now ex-) girlfriend telling me about guys beeping her, yelling at her, slowing their cars down, winding down their windows, laughing, when she was out jogging. I found that difficult to process. It suggested that, when I wasn't looking, the world operated in a starkly different way.
Same goes for when one is picking chestnuts or looking for mushrooms. Or noticing how many other people have a car of the same make and model as oneself.So he really focused and eventually he saw a giant arachnid dangling between the two trees in front of him. Then he turned around. They were fucking EVERYWHERE! He'd been surrounded by them the whole time, he just didn't know how to see them.
Well, more power to you, then!After that I started seeing it everywhere. It's not that it hadn't been happening around me, it's just that I never tuned in. I'm in no particular position of power either, but at least I have the power to tell creeps to go fuck themselves when they start harassing lone women in the street. All because one friend who went to Australia and another who once had to walk single file taught me not to trust my biases over their experience.
Were your girlfriends who were accosted by men when they were alone? — baker
What exactly are we talking about? Do you think I'm a right-winger? — baker
Then there's a bias there as well, one of jumping to conclusions where, if one is looking for X, one is more likely to see it, and also interpret Y and Z as X. — baker
You said:Were your girlfriends who were accosted by men when they were alone?
— baker
Wut? — Kenosha Kid
To which I replied:Everyone's in a position of power all the time. — Kenosha Kid
Sure.No, nor do I think I *was* a right-winger. Nonetheless examining our biases to avoid misleading or, in this case, failing to protect others is important.
As I exemplified right away with looking for chestnuts and mushrooms. I experience it every ear: I go to collect chestnuts, I know where the trees are, but when I'm first there, I don't notice the chestnuts on the ground. I really have to look to begin seeing them, and then I continue seeing them.That's true, but in my example the difference was qualitative (no spiders --> many spiders) rather than quantitative (some spiders --> many spiders).
I think the real topic is if the leftist bias hinders open discussion. — ssu
Were your girlfriends who were accosted by men when they were alone? — baker
I go to collect chestnuts, I know where the trees are, but when I'm first there, I don't notice the chestnuts on the ground. I really have to look to begin seeing them, and then I continue seeing them. — baker
Were your girlfriends who were accosted by men when they were alone?
— baker
Ah. Yes, always. — Kenosha Kid
I think he’s asking if they were in a position of power then. — Pfhorrest
Were your girlfriends (who were accosted by men when they were) alone? — Kenosha Kid
As you yourself noticed, racism is a separate issue and not dependent on the right/left divide. More typically is that the response if someone brings up ideas of some thinker or philosopher is quite different depending on the political side. For some reason, one side invokes a serious and cordial response, while another is invokes jeering. But this is quite natural for especially those who feel passionately of their ideology and see the opposite side as basically evil.It should hinder e.g. racism, which tends to live on the right. But not always (e.g. anti-Semitism in the British Labour party.) It doesn't matter where it comes from, it should not be tolerated imo. — Kenosha Kid
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.