Comments

  • Some Thoughts on Human Existence
    Looking to the future, there is then an infinity of time ahead of us in which we don't exist. Isn't this also a scary thought? — jasonm

    No, it is not. It is actually soothing. If there could be an infinity of time ahead of us in which we don't exist, we would get rid of a lot of pain for a long time then. Without existence, there is no awareness of despair. I think you might see both scenarios as "scary" because you seem to be very attached to life, and the consciousness of staying alive.
  • Is communism an experiment?
    Is democracy a grand but failed experiment? — Tom Storm

    :up:

    Democracy is just an outrageous collective despair...
  • Cartoon of the day
    A cartoon by Adam Douglas Thompson posted by 'The New Yorker'

    a-cartoon-by-adam-douglas-thompson-posted-by-the-new-yorker-v0-70s5cw4muw5d1.jpeg?width=1080&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=7da2469110a89833f49a0566a5193132cffd5812
  • Eliminating Decision Problem Undecidability
    I wondered if it wasn't my ignorance of the topic that didn't allow me to follow the conversation. — Lionino

    Same here. I remember I took part in one of @PL Olcott' s threads when he focused on 'Carol' (yes/no incorrect questions. Here). I did my best arguing with him, but he always twisted the words with the aim of making circular points. I ended up with the conclusion that it was actually my fault for not being capable of following his points. I felt very ignorant about myself.
  • Finding a Suitable Partner
    How a discussion about doing the dishes will lead to divorce is because people just keep adding oil to the fire. — Benkei

    Yeah, but what I have never understood is why those kinds of couples are still together despite they keep adding oil to the fire. It seemed to me that they just "love" that. The thorny feeling of constant confrontation...
  • Finding a Suitable Partner
    You'll find your partner unexpectedly. — L'éléphant

    I agree. But that might mean @Bob Ross would have to stop finding a suitable partner. So, the only way to meet a suitable person is to stop looking for her (him), because she (he) will show up unexpectedly.

    Hmm... is this a paradox?
  • Filosofía de la lengua española.
    Justifico mi afirmación a partir del principio de que una cosa causa la otra (luego la otra es consecuencia de la cosa), y, si no sabe el paradero de alguien, no solamente no se sabe si vive o descansa en paz pero se sabe nada sobre la persona, si todavía tiene piernas o si le gusta la matemática. Desaparecido significa alguien en paradero desconocido, las consecuencias no necesitan de ser mencionadas. — Lionino

    Sí. Pero a en el ínterin en que esa persona se encuentra desaparecida, surgen una serie de efectos distintos que pueden surtir consecuencias en su persona. Generalmente, cuando una persona desaparece sus bienes se ponen en administración y puede darse que el cónyuge, hijos, u otros perciban sus frutos, rentas e intereses. Además ni siquiera se pueden enajenar. Pongamos que el ausente al final vuelve porque aparece. Evidentemente tiene derecho a recobrar sus bienes. Sin embargo, de la definición de la RAE parece que la esperanza de que vuelva a aparecer se diluye, cómo efectivamente ocurre con la muerte y de ahí que los confunda (en mi opinión) entre otros sinónimos.

    Es evidente que no puedo volver de la muerte después de fenecido. Pero si hay una posibilidad, aunque sea mínima de aparecer después de desaparecido.

    No sé si es bien verdad que el adjetivo "desaparecido" sea monosémico... — Lionino

    En esto me expliqué mal. Traté de hacer una comparación respecto del estudio de Austin en su libro "Sense and Sensibilia". Este autor trata bastante de la palabra "real" y en ella afirma que "siempre" tiene el mismo significado. Es decir, nos es ambigua, no da lugar a confusiones entre interlocutores. En mi opinión esto pasa con desaparecido en español. El significado no va a variar. No obstante, muchos de sus sinónimos si que lo hacen y son ambiguos. Por este motivo, en situaciones en que una persona se va a encontrar "sin paradero conocido y sin noticias de ella" la gente va a decir: desaparecido.
    No creo que piensen en muerto/difunto porque la esperanza de que vuelva no se ha esfumado...

    yo hubiera respondido que el profesor no ha llevado en consideración conocimientos básicos de gramática. Ni todas palabras tienen sinónimos, y las que los tienen, no pueden ser substituidas por sus sinónimos todas las veces, si no serían sinónimos absolutos. — Lionino

    Pensé lo mismo que tú cuando lo escuché en la radio. Sencillamente creía que "ausente" valdría como mínimo cómo sinónimo pero ni eso...
    En fin, los exámenes de nuestro país suelen tener preguntas raras pero este año se pasaron...

    Yo diría que el complemento del verbo 'ser' es algo intrínseco mientras 'estar' el complemento es extrínseco; ejemplo: "Soy rubio" y "Estoy rubio" significan cosas completamente distintas, y sabemos bien lo que significa cada — una es una característica innata y otra una característica adquirida. — Lionino

    Muy bien explicado. Efectivamente. Pero la movida sucede cuando hay que explicarlo en inglés porque siempre se utiliza "I am". Para esas dos frases sencillamente se diría "I am Blonde" y es normal que se líen al estudiar español en distinguir ambos.

    Curiosamente, cuando un niño estudia inglés dice por ignorancia: I have 8 years old porque para ellos suena raro decir "soy 8 años viejo" (I am eight years old...)
  • Currently Reading
    Four Walls by Vanghélis Hadziyannidis.

    Don’t miss Greek literature! :smile:
  • Filosofía de la lengua española.
    Hablo (Escribo? Leo?) español — Moliere

    Lo más importante es que pienses en español. Ese es el truco. La inmersión (immersion) en la lengua. A veces yo he tenido sueños en inglés… Sé que puede resultar raro, pero sucede cuándo estás muy sumergido en una lengua. Mi reto es experimentar esto también con la lengua japonesa, pero va a resultar difícil :sweat:

    Espero practicar española y filosofía en español. — Moliere

    Genial :up: pero vamos a hacer todo más sencillo. La frase de arriba puede abreviarse: Espero practicar filosofía en español y el idioma.

    Also I don't think there's an English equivelent to estar/ser, which is very interesting — Moliere

    True. This is the main topic of the Spanish language, and I even think it could be an interesting thread about philosophy of language. So, yes, I will try to explain to you the differences between ser and estar. As you noted, there is no equivalent in English because the particle is always “I am”…

    OK. “Ser” is an irregular verb. Its function is to affirm from the subject what is meant by the attribute. For example: I am from Madrid. You are a doctor. As a general rule, ser must match with the subject in number and person. Another example: Dos días son demasiado cuando hay un afán de por medio» English: Two days are too long when there's an eagerness involved.

    “Estar” is also an irregular verb. In general, the verb “estar” is used when the characteristic attributed to the subject is considered by the speaker to be the result of an action, transformation or change, real or supposed, or is considered to be non-permanent, linked to a specific spatio-temporal situation.
    We can define it as: To be in a certain place, time, situation or circumstance. For example: Estoy en Madrid (I am in Madrid). Mi pueblo está en Toledo (my village is in Toledo). Mañana estaré en Londres…
    (I will be in London tomorrow…) do you see the dependent upon spatio-temporal situations? :smile:

    So, ser is an attribute while estar is mostly an adverb of time, place and situation.

    Lesson of the day done! You can play with your friends in The Lounge. :wink:
  • All things Cannabis
    ↪0 thru 9
    Japan! Nice news for our Samurai lads.

    Japan Government Opens Public Comment Period for Cannabis Reform

    Over the next few weeks, public comments will be submitted regarding the future of Japan’s cannabis regulatory framework.
    We have been waiting a long time for this, (Antoniazzi said). It is a huge milestone for the global cannabis industry. Japan is the first country to approve CBD in food, paving the way for corporate companies to list CBD products in retail chains. Japan has had a rich history in hemp cultivation, with the production of CBD with little to no THC being utilized in Shinto religious practices since 2016.
    .

    But we have to be careful in Tokyo...

    However, it also introduced revised laws regarding illegal use and stated that someone in violation of the law could serve up to seven years in prison. Prior to the reformed law, Japan only punished violations for import, export, cultivating, and possession. Euromonitor estimated that 0.12% (extremely low ratio!) of Japanese people consume cannabis illegally at least once per year, which has led to an increase in both illegal cultivation and processing.
    .
  • Currently Reading
    (Also, how do I enter italics on the mobile version of the forum?) — Jafar

    The BBCode to enter italics on the mobile version is: 
    [i] * your text * [/i]

    Welcome to TPF, Jafar.
  • Filosofía de la lengua española.
    Espero que no te importe que haya usado el traductor de Google para que lo lean nuestros angloparlantes. — Philosophim

    No worries! Thanks for your help! By the way, I posted it in the subcategory of Non-English discussions, because we are now allowed to post in Spanish. Beautiful romantic language. Doesn't it?

    I google translated for our curious English speakers. Its a little rough, but it seems to cover JL Austin — Philosophim

    Exactly. It is focused on JL Austin's 'Sense and Sensibilia'. We made a comment on this text about this six or seven months ago. But I wanted to show that his theories also apply to the vast vocabulary of Spanish, and some words can be tricky. Like the word 'real' which is used by Austin. :smile:
  • Non-English Discussions
    Thanks @Moliere :heart:
  • Non-English Discussions
    Non-English discussions in Spanish and German can now be posted — fdrake

    Spanish: https://thephilosophyforum.com/categories/52/spanish-discussion — fdrake

    :heart:

    Wow! Incredible. Thank you, thank you, thank you! Given the fact that my native language is not, let's say, 'prominent' in philosophy, I appreciate that you have taken it into account. I appreciate it so much. I will post a discussion on the Spanish sub category later on.
  • Finding a Suitable Partner
    Ironically, this pompous thread is on the main page while 'Kant's ethic is protestant' is in the lounge. Sometimes you will never know how TPF will work. Like the future 'suitable partner' you are looking for, @Bob Ross
  • How would you respond to the trolley problem?
    This is a trolley: — Banno

    This is a tram: — Banno

    That was informative, thank you. We call the first montacargas and the second tranvía. I thought you were interested to know this, and maybe (just maybe) it can help us to solve the trolley problem.
  • Coronavirus
    [Deleted. I know I am stupid]
  • Coronavirus
    [Deleted. I know I am stupid]
  • What Are You Watching Right Now?
    @T Clark

    Hey, Clarky. After having a good marathon of only Japanese films this weekend, I would like to recommend you to watch 'Warm Water Under A Red Bridge'. It is the weirdest Japanese film I have ever seen. It is intellectually funny, and the dialogues are awesome. Another remarkable fact is that it was the last film directed by Shohei Imamura.
    I remember you told me that you had a special channel called 'Criterion' which includes Japanese films. I hope that channel has this film. I personally believe you will like it.

  • The Process of a Good Discussion
    An AI is unlikely to correct such things because there is actually nothing wrong - but they sound foreign. — unenlightened

    I agree. The AI is unlikely to correct or proofread 'argot' or slang words. It just proofread basic grammar sense with the aim of making my paragraphs sense. But I wasn't referring to this specifically. It is obvious that I always sound 'foreigner' because I have a lot of hiccups in English when I type. One of the main issues which burdened me the most is the difference between 'in', 'on' and 'at'. We just have one word in Spanish to include all those three: 'en...' etc. And other aspects related to gender, conditionals, the bloody 'going to' instead of will, etc.
    (Estoy yendo al taller = I am going to the workshop.
    Iré al taller luego... = I will go to the workshop later on...)

    But I don't attempt to be a snowflake. Those tricks in English end up being controlled after years of practising and reading in English.

    My point went deeper than just that. I personally felt that my posts were, let's say, senseless because of the criticism of my grammar. But never mind any more! Just malicious users typing twisted posts!
  • The Process of a Good Discussion
    #2

    I hope you don't take me wrong, but it is fascinating what occurred to me a half-hour ago. I wrote an email to Alkis in English, and in most cases, when the text is done, I like to check the grammar on web pages to make sure I don't make mistakes. When I pasted my original text to the grammar check corrector, the 'bot' or 'AI' answered: Congratulations! Your message is well written, no mistakes detected!
    I couldn't believe so. I checked the text twice and yes, zero grammatical mistakes on my side.

    What does happen then? Does artificial intelligence lie to me? Doesn't the bot or AI detect grammar mistakes from a non-native speaker? I have been drastically criticised for my poor English here. First, in the short story competition, and then in some threads. Very hard to follow, badly written and bla bla. It was clear (according to some) that those posts and short story were written by a non-native speaker, but that's a lie, and lying is bad. How did you know if they were corrected by a grammar checker?

    I was debating with a malicious user about what a paradox is. I tried my best at debating, but the discussion was over because I was not comfortable typing in English, according to him. Here is when the malicious user gets trapped in his own ignorance. It is impossible to say to me that I am not comfortable debating in English if my texts are proofread by a grammar checker. But, I get it. I know I will keep reading similar comments if someone does not agree with me in the future. It is just some of you behave and post with malice.

    So, it will not be possible to have a good discussion, because there are folks acting with twisted manners and malice. Be cautious!
  • The News Discussion
    Why does the government of my country love to sue or accuse people and businesses worldwide?

    Spain fines Ryanair, easyJet, Vueling and Volotea 150 million euros for hand luggage charges

    First the President of Argentina, now Ryanair.

    The Ministry of Social Rights, Consumer Affairs and Agenda 2030 has fined Ryanair, easyJet, Vueling and Volotea 150 million euros for “abusive practices” when charging for hand luggage. The penalty is based on the infringements of extra charges for booking an adjacent seat to accompany minors or dependents, charging for the transport of hand luggage, being “opaque...”
  • Currently Reading
    ↪T Clark
    Wow, that's interesting though, because Murakami has always been criticised for not being Japanese in the purest aesthetic sense. It takes me a while to turn back to him because his works are very deep. I know I will suffer a big sensation of nostalgia after finishing one of his novels, and I will miss some of the characters. I tend to get very attached to what he writes. I wish I could meet Aomame (1Q84) or Noboru Wataya (The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle) in real life. But I am aware this is impossible, because they only exist in the book, and they belong to fiction, and this makes me feel a weird nostalgia.
  • The News Discussion
    ↪frank
    We have to wait until September then because the ECB will do whatever the Fed does.
  • The News Discussion
    The reason Wall St is happy is that it means Powell may lower interest rates a little sooner. — frank

    We are expecting the same from Christine Lagarde here in Europe. I think she may start to lower the interests as well and try to control the price of money in a more balanced way. When the interest rate went up, it was unbearable for most families to face the paying of mortgages and this sense of anxiety is stressful. In countries with low incomes, like mine's, shrinking interests could be a 'lifesaver' for thousands of families.

    Let's see what the U.S. Federal Reserve and European Central Bank will do this summer...
  • Currently Reading
    ↪praxis
    :up: :smile:
  • What are you listening to right now?
    @Jamal
    @Lionino

    When we talked about Soviet/Brutalist architecture... Well, some Brutalist music to chill out.
  • Currently Reading
    First Person Singular, by Haruki Murakami.

    There is nothing like coming back to Murakami after a while. Do you still read some of his works, @praxis?
  • The News Discussion
    I was an English teacher for many years. — Sir2u

    I wish I had you as an English teacher in my school. You seem to be a very dedicated person and the passion for teaching flourished when I had some debates with you about English irregular verbs and philosophy of language last year. Honduran folks were lucky to have you. I didn't have a 'native' English teacher until I started university. Bloody moocow...
  • The Process of a Good Discussion
    But my first thought, reading the above, was that there is an unfortunate tendency to make a discussion into a competition. It's not exactly mischief, but it does tend to undermine what I see as the purpose of discussion. — unenlightened

    Although that is not the common behaviour among the users, yes, I usually felt some threads go on that way. It seems like a competition for who is right, or more specifically, who is the one who gives more 'strong answers'. This is very difficult to reach inside the nature of philosophy. Even the forum says: 'start a new discussion'. It is obvious we are here to discuss different opinions.

    And having to try and communicate with one who is struggling a little with the language forces one to be more simple and clear if possible, which is always a good thing, but also makes one rethink for oneself ideas that may have become stale. — unenlightened

    I agree with this. I understand that if I force others to be more considered of me for not being native, I am at the risk of reducing the quality of the conversation. Exactly in this context, I have to admit it is my fault if I can't seriously follow him with fluency. But, being honest, I hardly experienced this. When I read a thread and I feel it is too complex for me, I decide not to dive into it. I only tend to post wherever I feel comfortable and ready to have a fruitful discussion with others. Nonetheless, it is obvious that philosophy is very complex itself! Imagine it in another language when even translation can change the sense. Crazy and beautiful at the same time!

    In general, I don't think there are special rules that apply to discussion that don't apply to other interactions; respect, kindness, honesty — unenlightened

    True. But, again, most of the people are quite nice here. Yet, I wanted to share my thoughts because I felt that maybe the language is a tougher barrier than I ever imagined.
  • The Process of a Good Discussion
    ↪Outlander
    Thanks for the feedback, Outlander.

    I do not feel scared to ask questions when I don't understand something, and even at The Shoutbox my posts are often proofread, something that I am grateful for because it helps me to keep improving. I also have had the same feeling as yours in some threads. When I read them I feel lost the first time, so I need to reread again or even use DeepL to translate some parts.

    But this issue goes deeper than just that. I have the feeling that some users accused me of being non-native with bad manners, with the aim of derailing the main topic. Whenever I try to make arguments, I personally believe that I do my best.
    Then, it is not possible to keep a 'good discussion' if the other interlocutor is already biased on my lack of fluency. I think this should not matter at all. If we are debating, let's say, about Kierkegaard's works, we should focus on this topic. Our level of English is accessory.
  • The Process of a Good Discussion
    I came back to this important thread and I reread all the answers. The main point that we discussed last year was why some threads were more active than others. I think we could say this has got better than before because there is a nice balance and most of the threads are active, and many members are very involved with them.

    Yet I have to share another issue that is limiting me to having a good discussion, or from enjoying posting at least.

    It is well known that there are members whose native language is not English. I am not the only one, and I acknowledge that inside the group of non-native speakers there are some whose level is high and others (myself) are not that precise or good.
    This fact has never been a good deal, and I mostly enjoyed my presence here, posting mainly in The Shoutbox.

    But when I try to discuss with another member of a serious topic, the interlocutor accuses me of not having a great level of English instead of focusing on the main topic of the OP. I personally don't know whether this is posted with mischief or my lack of 'fluency' is actually the cause of not performing a good discussion.

    I wish I could know. I want to improve and maintain 'fruitful' discussions.
  • The Barber of Seville
    ↪RogueAI
    I didn't ask for your opinion.
  • The Barber of Seville
    ↪flannel jesus
    You are the one who is correcting me and highlighting my grammatical mistakes, mate…

    By the way, I tried to explain that “except for” and “apart from” are different. One is an adverb and the other is a preposition. When I translate into Spanish it makes a great difference if I use one or another in the sentence, but it seems in English it is not that important.

    Let’s leave it there. You just discovered I suck at a language I am not native to, and we derailed from the main point of the thread which is a paradox, not proofreading my sentences.
    I experienced this before here in the forum. It is not the first time, and it will not be the last one…
  • The Barber of Seville
    ↪flannel jesus
    I know I am debating correctly when you don’t know how to answer back to me rather than just attacking my English skills knowing that I am not a native speaker.

    You give up on continuing debating on the paradox, right?
  • The Barber of Seville
    ↪flannel jesus
    No. I want you to see this:

    “Apart from” and “except for” are different things.

    The first means “plus”. So, is there a barber in Seville apart from the one who shaves the people and himself? It is cumulative. There could be the possibility that others could shave the barber. But who If he is the only one in Seville?
    The second means “minus”. Is there a barber except for the one who shaves others and himself? It is excluding. There cannot be a paradox because we already take for granted that the barber is the only one in Seville.
  • The Barber of Seville
    ↪flannel jesus
    See! It is a linguistic paradox. You are getting closer to the approach of this thread. :smile:

    The text states that besides adds something to the clause. It means "plus". Except (of) means minus; it has a meaning of excluding something. Apart from is a combination of the two, meaning plus / minus depending on the context.

    https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/565669/difference-between-besides-apart-from-and-except-for-prepositions-vs-adv#:~:text=Except%20(of)%20means%20minus%3B,minus%20depending%20on%20the%20context.
  • The Barber of Seville
    ↪flannel jesus
    Mate, this is not a simple story. If you are an expert at recognizing paradoxes, why do you not try to define them or at least explain how they work to me. I am still waiting for your answer.

    On the other hand…

    I pour milk for everyone in my house except for me. Who pours milk for me? — flannel jesus

    The premise is badly written. The OP didn’t say “except” but “apart”. This means if there is someone, apart from A, who can commit the action.

    In the paradox of the OP, A is the barber, who shaves others in the same city. But, paradoxically, there can’t be Y because there is not another barber apart from him. He can shave himself, but is there someone who can shave him?

    The same happens in your irregular example. There could be a paradox if we say: you pour the milk for everyone in your house. You can pour the milk by yourself. But is there someone who could pour the milk apart from you?
  • The Barber of Seville
    or maybe there are more barbers in Seville but they aren't all called "the barber of Seville", — flannel jesus

    No. There aren't more barbers in Seville, this is the key of the paradox.

    someone from outside Seville, or someone who isn't a barber, — flannel jesus

    You share my point then. It is a paradox because, although he is the one who shaves the people of Seville, there is not another who can shave him. So, he needs to leave the city to be shaved by a different barber of him.

    Or maybe nobody shaves him, — flannel jesus

    It is not about if someone shaves him or not, but if there is a possibility to be shaved in Seville by a different barber apart from him!

    This isn't a paradox — flannel jesus

    You haven't explained what is a paradox yet! :blush:
  • The Barber of Seville
    This isn't a paradox. — flannel jesus

    It will be very informative what you consider (and please explain) a paradox, because according to your posts, none of the previous threads are paradoxes.

    The sentence of the op is clearly, plainly, easily possible. Nothing remotely challenging about imagining a man shaving all men in his village except himself. — flannel jesus

    That's where your mistake pops up. You only understand paradoxes as mathematical challenges against common sense. Again, this is a linguistic paradox, not something related to algebra.

    We have a linguistic paradox here because of the following premises:

    A) The Barber of Seville shaves all the men of Seville

    B) Apart from himself.

    And C) Who shaves the Barber of Seville then?

    The paradox is that the Barber of Seville can shave everyone in Seville, but there is not another barber who can shave him.
    If there are no more barbers in Seville apart from him... who shaves him, Sherlock?
Home » javi2541997