TheMadFool

:flower:

:point: Godwin's Law This thread is, I suppose, fast-tracking Godwin's law.

I'm shocked, stupefied that you got that symbolism wrong. It's actually, The Three Poisons 1. Snake = Hatred 2. Pig = Ignorance 3. Rooster = Vanity I ...

:up: The no-doctrines way. That touched a chord in me. The notion of "factually correct" becomes meaningless.

Hanlon's Razor I have issues, serious ones, with stupidity but then there's only one species which, on the whole, isn't stupid - homo sapiens - and lo...

That's an understatement. :ok:

Sorry to hear that but not that I'm anti-Palestine.

At least they know science's weak spot! Kudos to them! Scientists should respect an opponent who's aware of their Achilles' heel.

Yep, :ok: It's hard to tell the difference. I thought you had something on him. It would've made for, at the very least, an interesting conversation.

:sweat:

What's so funny? I just started a book (Sapiens) by him. Should I stop? WTF?

So, would I be correct if I said, 1. Sa?v?ti (provisional truth): about the world as it appears, Maya (illusion) is truth-apt. Kantian phenomenon. 2. ...

My bad, I should've been clearer. "Leads to" was meant in the sense ideologically and not chronologically. That's how far-sighted the buddha was; he w...

Complementarity (Physics) The complementarity principle is just that one object may possess pairs of properties such that only one but not both can be...

I was simply trying out a different avenue, thinking of other ways of how science could cyclically rise and fall.

I don't know what your version of cycle framework vis-à-vis science is but have you considered this one: We begin with a nonscientific paradigm (relig...

It's quite interesting. I've read only a handful of chapters but I've already learned quite a bit.

A private language user, if fae's not sure if fae's using the sign, say, S, correctly has only one option: ask faerself about whether S is being used ...

The connexion between science and philosophy stretches bsck to the very beginning of philosophy or should I say science. Is there a difference?

I brought up consciousness because Wittgenstein, despite his exceptional ability to find good examples, only uses ones that are about consciousness, s...

:ok:

Forget that I mentioned it.

You are a composite of who you think you are and who others think you are. You have an identity, a self, in every conceivable discipline - a sociologi...

Here's a thought. If you take people who refuse to vote in elections (the voter turnout is never 100%) as those who eschew engaging in politics then, ...

1 is just another of saying what I said (veto not volo, kind courtesy of @"180 Proof") 2 Obeying/complying rounds off to no free will; resisting/refus...

I'll take first bite. It appears that Wittgenstein's private language argument is about, all things considered, the subjective nature of consciousness...

Ok but there must be a very good reason there are no philosopher politicians. Just like there are no Jain terrorists, it must mean something, no?

I don't have to check but I know of no philosopher who's also a politician.

1. Christianity leads to 2. Buddhism leads to 2. Secular ethics leads to 3. My prediction: maturation of our moral intuitions .

The plain and simple answer seems to be fiction is that which has no physical form or that which can't be verified. Fact, the exact opposite.

Let's just say, facts are ontological entities, in a sense what is, really is and truth is epistemological, what we know or think we know.

I now see what the problem is with ethics and genetic engineering. We, play along please, invented God because we realized that we fail as moral being...

Fact is usually contrasted with Fiction. It (fact) differs from truth in that the latter can be assumed in a fictonal world. So, for instance, Sherloc...

Perhaps a computer analogy will aid the discussion. I turn on my laptop, wait for the OS to load, log in with my password, and click the game icon Civ...

Self-reflection (examining ourselves) + Self-affecting (causal-reflexivity i.e. our thoughts cause other thoughts and these others, ad infinitum or cy...

We also say, "he's lost his mind!" and "her keen mind cracked the case.". By your reasoning, we're not our minds either. We're neither our bodies nor ...

If memory serves, there's the idea that when it comes to psychololgy, it's very difficult to put the required level of distance between the observer/r...

It appears that we can't make a case against genetic engineering for the simple reason that we're already doing what it does - choose traits we find d...

You misunderstand, I meant to say claws, fangs, strength aren't tools.

A tool transcends the physical limits of an organism, allows an organism to do what their bodies can't. For example, a tiger can use material at its d...

Good point! There's no difference between breeding dogs and hybridizing an elephant with a mammoth except that mammoths have been out of circulation f...

Tool making? Attacking/defending/foraging/etc. can be vastly improved with tools. Granted that some animals know how to fashion tools, Caledonian crow...

A bit of both some say. Double the threat, twice as likely to die out. All this reminds me of dear ol' Jesus - resurrection! I hope when this mammoth ...

Ok but my point still stands! No animal has been documented to have learned life-lessons from a human.

I'm reading Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari and he mentions a theory that language was used primarily for gossip by early humans - it served the specific...

More like The Island Of Dr. Moreau There's an underlying paradox in this: 1. We need to undo the damage done by humans (mammoths were allegedly hunted...

All I mean to say is, so long as we grasp the limited nature of our senses, presently 5 (sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell), and also take into ...

From the Cambridge Dictionary Speak for yourself: something you say to someone to say that the opinion that they have just expressed is not the same a...

:ok: