First, the reason why we talk about the paradoxes so much is that they are interesting precisely because we cannot readily solve them. — Chany
Results are results. If they aren't what you "desire" then maybe you should try to be more objective and understand that the results were never guaranteed to be desirable to the human species, or even life for that matter. — Harry Hindu
They are simply rules for human beings to follow in order to stay in line with the cultures they are born in. — Harry Hindu
I ask because despite its being so fervently touted as the sparkling jewel of philosophy there's so many ''issues'' that have not yielded the desired results. — TheMadFool
logical analysis of the moral landscape has utterly failed in providing a satisfactory solution to its problem — TheMadFool
Then there are so many (wikipedia has a long list) paradoxes that span the breadth of our knowledge framework - conundrums logic cannot handle. — TheMadFool
Should we stubbornly continue to apply (or is it misapply) reason and logic to these problems? I think it's high time we looked at new avenues, new tools to apply to these problems. Who among us has the spark of creativity to unravel the truths hidden in these logic-resistant fields? — TheMadFool
If we ever find something that is more powerful than rationality, then every rational person will adopt it! — VagabondSpectre
Why do you think that? It was rationality applied to the question of whether it is ethical to own another human that ended the slave trade.For example take ethics - logical analysis of the moral landscape has utterly failed in providing a satisfactory solution to its problems. — TheMadFool
The value of philosophy is rather in its critical methodology, where conclusions are challenged, where assumptions are ferreted out and undermined, and so on. Doing this in perpetuity is the project of philosophy. Finding consensus solutions is not.
This isn't to suggest that individual philosophers shouldn't reach conclusions, shouldn't aim for figuring out answers in their view.
And of course many will disagree with what I say here. They wouldn't be doing philosophy if they didn't disagree. — Terrapin Station
The value is the critical methodology. — Terrapin Station
It's just like the value of a screwdriver isn't a completed item and then we're done. The value of a screwdriver is that we can screw things in and out with it. — Terrapin Station
We want it to be able to keep performing those actions. It's a tool to use. — Terrapin Station
You want the tool to be able to keep working as it does in perpetuity. — Terrapin Station
If you're asking me a question such as "why identify fallacies" in the context of a conversation that I'd feel is worth having--and in good faith, I'd proceed as if that's what's going on--then I'd assume that you're asking non-sardonically, and that you're asking because you want me to explain something to you. — Terrapin Station
Nope, I don't want you to explain anything to me — Noble Dust
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.