Top Ten List

[Faust]

1. There are almost certainly events that cause other events, but there seem to be uncaused causes. Sometimes, things are the way they seem.

2. The distinction between events and objects is one of convenience and has mostly to do with the scale upon which humans live.

3. Morality is all about politics and power, but that doesn't make it useless or wrongheaded.

4. Most interesting concepts exist on a continuum. Trying to avoid that has led to huge errors, particularly by philosophers.

5. Philosophy is the art of formulating arguments about ideas for which there is no consensus.

6. Consensus about proper descriptions of the world is called "science."

7. Epistemology is a sucker bet.

8. A very good analogy for morality is found in the ever-changing NFL rules.

9. Philosophy is only about language.

10. Academia has all but killed jazz. Same with philosophy.

[Karpel Tunnel]

1. There are almost certainly events that cause other events, but there seem to be unused causes. Sometimes, things are the way they seem.

I liked 'unused' causes as an idea, though I suspect it's a typo for 'uncaused'

7. Epistemology is a sucker bet.

Can you expand?

[bahman]

1. There are almost certainly events that cause other events, but there seem to be unused causes. Sometimes, things are the way they seem.

True. We do uncause cause when we decide.

2. The distinction between events and objects is one of convenience and has mostly to do with the scale upon which humans live.

True. Events are about change in object.

3. Morality is all about politics and power, but that doesn't make it useless or wrongheaded.

True only in social scale.

4. Most interesting concepts exist on a continuum. Trying to avoid that has led to huge errors, particularly by philosophers.

Could you please give an example?

5. Philosophy is the art of formulating arguments about ideas for which there is no consensus.

This means that people don't know the truth.

6. Consensus about proper descriptions of the world is called "science."

True.

7. Epistemology is a sucker bet.

Could you please elaborate?

8. A very good analogy for morality is found in the ever-changing NFL rules.

What is NFL?

9. Philosophy is only about language.

Philosophy is about constructing the basic knowledge.

10. Academia has all but killed jazz. Same with philosophy.

Is that true?

[iambiguous]

Now all we need is an actual context. One in which to flesh out the meaning of those words.

[Faust]

1. There are almost certainly events that cause other events, but there seem to be unused causes. Sometimes, things are the way they seem.

I liked 'unused' causes as an idea, though I suspect it's a typo for 'uncaused'

7. Epistemology is a sucker bet.

Can you expand?

Yup. Typo. I've corrected it.

Epistemology has historically been used to justify a moral theory. Plato, quite obviously. Hume used it to justify atheism. Descartes, Kant, all the greats. It's a phantom.

[Faust]

bahman - an example of the errors philosophers have made? They are rife. Low-lying fruit is Kant. A lie is always wrong, as if there aren't many shades of grey to lying.

Most people do know the truth. Where truth applies. It just doesn't apply to all the circumstances that many deep thinkers think it does.

[Faust]

Now all we need is an actual context. One in which to flesh out the meaning of those words.

You got me - all ten are really about abortion.

[Pedro I Rengel]

"2. The distinction between events and objects is one of convenience and has mostly to do with the scale upon which humans live. "

After all this time, and Faust still has the ability to blow my mind.

Pchoof. Talk about simultaneously legitimizing and destroying the entire field of phenomenology. If such a thing can even be called a field.


Thanks for this list Faust, always a pleasure.

Good to know philosophy lives.

I need to step outside for a moment...

[Pedro I Rengel]

"9. Philosophy is only about language. "

This one I have trouble with. Not s'sure there is anything to gain by this distinction. Maybe gives alnguage a teeny bit too much credit, which then might cause a reaction of not giving language enough credit.

S'tricky. s'tricky. But I'll think on it.

[Faust]

"2. The distinction between events and objects is one of convenience and has mostly to do with the scale upon which humans live. "

After all this time, and Faust still has the ability to blow my mind.

Pchoof. Talk about simultaneously legitimizing and destroying the entire field of phenomenology. If such a thing can even be called a field.


Thanks for this list Faust, always a pleasure.

Good to know philosophy lives.

I need to step outside for a moment...

It's one of those things most people know, but don't really know that they know.

[Faust]

"9. Philosophy is only about language. "

This one I have trouble with. Not s'sure there is anything to gain by this distinction. Maybe gives alnguage a teeny bit too much credit, which then might cause a reaction of not giving language enough credit.

S'tricky. s'tricky. But I'll think on it.

Philosophy doesn't tell us what we know, it allows us to better know what we are saying. Unless it's done wrong, which it usually is.

[Pedro I Rengel]

9. Philosophy is only about language.

I mean this might be the very thing that gave us Witgenstein and Chomsky.

I mean, raise your hand if you are grateful Chomsky happened? I dunno. And W, running around in circles like a decapitated chicken.

It's a tricky one, this one.

[Pedro I Rengel]

"Philosophy doesn't tell us what we know, it allows us to better know what we are saying."

Ok, that actually works for me.

Stepping outside now.

[Faust]

9. Philosophy is only about language.

I mean this might be the very thing that gave us Witgenstein and Chomsky.

I mean, raise your hand if you are grateful Chomsky happened? I dunno. And W, running around in circles like a decapitated chicken.

It's a tricky one, this one.

It gave us all of them, even the bad ones, like Wittgy. Plato's Allegory of the cave is a classic, right? What the fuck was that even about, except that philosophers should rule everyone else? Philosophers like, um...... Plato! He was talking about exactly nothing that actually exists. Famous guy, though.

[Faust]

Oh, batman. National Football League, which has got nothing to do with football is you live anywhere except the US, I guess.

Philosophy does not construct basic knowledge. It can help us answer the question, "If I say this, what else am I committed to?"

[bahman]

Oh, batman. National Football League, which has got nothing to do with football is you live anywhere except the US, I guess.

I see. Thanks for calling me batman.

Philosophy does not construct basic knowledge. It can help us answer the question, "If I say this, what else am I committed to?"

To me it does. Philosophy helps us to ask proper question and as you said help us to answer the question. It is about the way you are approaching the reality. It is the way. The rest is the details, science, art, ethic, etc. which each sits on the base, philosophy.

[Faust]

I gotta ditch this fucking autocorrect.

[Karpel Tunnel]

Epistemology has historically been used to justify a moral theory. Plato, quite obviously. Hume used it to justify atheism. Descartes, Kant, all the greats. It's a phantom.

So it's a sucker bet just in terms of justifying a particular moral theory, but you're not throwing it out in other contexts?

[barbarianhorde]

Epistemology has historically been used to justify a moral theory. Plato, quite obviously. Hume used it to justify atheism. Descartes, Kant, all the greats. It's a phantom.

What about epistemology as the attempt of knowing what we are saying?

[barbarianhorde]

6. Consensus about proper descriptions of the world is called "science."

Good list no doubt but its more fun to bicker. I will bicker with this. I think science isnt about consensus but about proofs that dont rely on consensus.
Its about being able to repeat an experiment and get the same result. A person by himself can conduct science and create a whole valid framework with which no other soul ever agrees.
There wasnt any consensus when Copernicus formulated things from experimenting and logical operations and I would really not agree that only when idiots finally came around to the facts only then it became science.

Science is made by hermits, away from the pointless distractions of being agreed or disagreed with.

Consensus was when the great Holy Men gathered in the st Peter and sat around voting unanimously that the Earth is flat.

[Karpel Tunnel]

Epistemology has historically been used to justify a moral theory. Plato, quite obviously. Hume used it to justify atheism. Descartes, Kant, all the greats. It's a phantom.

What about epistemology as the attempt of knowing what we are saying?

That would seem to be a part of it, but if that's the whole package, then we are not learning, via science, much about anything but what we think. Like we can't learn about cane toads, but we can learn what we are saying about cane toads. Making cane toads equivalent to unicorns.

[barbarianhorde]

4. Most interesting concepts exist on a continuum. Trying to avoid that has led to huge errors, particularly by philosophers.

What does this mean, you mean that for example, Newtons ideas had origin in Archimedes, Copernicus, Keppler, etc?
If so yes, I think all thought and all language has some relation to something that happened in the past.

It never occurred to me that there are phlosophers who tried to avoid having some roots for their thinking but maybe youre right, this could account for a lot of idiocies that have occurred.

(Be it idiot or idiocy, thing or event)

[barbarianhorde]

Epistemology has historically been used to justify a moral theory. Plato, quite obviously. Hume used it to justify atheism. Descartes, Kant, all the greats. It's a phantom.

What about epistemology as the attempt of knowing what we are saying?

That would seem to be a part of it, but if that's the whole package, then we are not learning, via science, much about anything but what we think. Like we can't learn about cane toads, but we can learn what we are saying about cane toads. Making cane toads equivalent to unicorns.

I think cane toads arent in the domain of epistemology, period. Edit - well unless ontology and epistemology are synthesized like in a certain dangerous philosophy out there.
They are in biology and possibly ontology. But a cane toad isnt a piece of knowledge primarily unless one goes to insane lengths to assert that there is nothing but text.

[barbarianhorde]

9. Philosophy is only about language.

Does this mean it is not about sex?

[iambiguous]

Now all we need is an actual context. One in which to flesh out the meaning of those words.

You got me - all ten are really about abortion.

Okay, pick one. Let's flesh this thing out.