Moderator: Only_Humean
I liked 'unused' causes as an idea, though I suspect it's a typo for 'uncaused'Faust wrote:1. There are almost certainly events that cause other events, but there seem to be unused causes. Sometimes, things are the way they seem.
Can you expand?7. Epistemology is a sucker bet.
Faust wrote:1. There are almost certainly events that cause other events, but there seem to be unused causes. Sometimes, things are the way they seem.
Faust wrote:2. The distinction between events and objects is one of convenience and has mostly to do with the scale upon which humans live.
Faust wrote:3. Morality is all about politics and power, but that doesn't make it useless or wrongheaded.
Faust wrote:4. Most interesting concepts exist on a continuum. Trying to avoid that has led to huge errors, particularly by philosophers.
Faust wrote:5. Philosophy is the art of formulating arguments about ideas for which there is no consensus.
Faust wrote:6. Consensus about proper descriptions of the world is called "science."
Faust wrote:7. Epistemology is a sucker bet.
Faust wrote:8. A very good analogy for morality is found in the ever-changing NFL rules.
Faust wrote:9. Philosophy is only about language.
Faust wrote:10. Academia has all but killed jazz. Same with philosophy.
Karpel Tunnel wrote:I liked 'unused' causes as an idea, though I suspect it's a typo for 'uncaused'Faust wrote:1. There are almost certainly events that cause other events, but there seem to be unused causes. Sometimes, things are the way they seem.Can you expand?7. Epistemology is a sucker bet.
iambiguous wrote:Now all we need is an actual context. One in which to flesh out the meaning of those words.
Pedro I Rengel wrote:"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 wrote:"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.
Pedro I Rengel wrote: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.
Faust wrote:Oh, batman. National Football League, which has got nothing to do with football is you live anywhere except the US, I guess.
Faust wrote:Philosophy does not construct basic knowledge. It can help us answer the question, "If I say this, what else am I committed to?"
Faust wrote: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 wrote: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 wrote:6. Consensus about proper descriptions of the world is called "science."
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 wrote:Faust wrote: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?
Faust wrote:4. Most interesting concepts exist on a continuum. Trying to avoid that has led to huge errors, particularly by philosophers.
Karpel Tunnel wrote: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 wrote:Faust wrote: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?
Faust wrote:9. Philosophy is only about language.
Faust wrote:iambiguous wrote: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.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users