Agent Smith

The first is usually the worst. Laugh away therefore. It is ludicrous! Planes were called Iron Birds! You take it from here!

Point made, point taken. One must take into account the general milieu into which religions are born. The Abrahamic religions, to my knowledge, weren'...

:rofl: Deepak Chopra is, charitably speaking, onto something!

This, to me, is much ado about nothing! :grin:

Well, I was looking at from an animal's point of view. Buddhism is decidely animal-friendly, while the Abrahamic Triad is distinctly not - Christianit...

There are two orders we can put all religions into: 1. Chronological order: Someone well-versed in theology should be able to help. The best I can do ...

:ok:

The Buddhist notion of "desire" is to be understood as a shackle/fetter/chain; something that imprisons an individual in what it calls samsara (one po...

For the record, I'm not trying to score points. Sorry if that's the impression you get. Must be my lack of linguistic proficiency. I hope you'll let t...

I thought there were 3 possibilities with respect to a proposition: 1. True. 2. False. 3. Unknown/Unknowable (undecidable with existing data and/or me...

I don't think you're correct; perhaps we're using different definitions for "undecidable". In my book, if a proposition p is undecidable it means we c...

:ok: What if I successfully refute the argument for a claim C. That means C is not true as the argument is flawed. However, I can't say that C is fals...

Isn't that (underlined bit of your post) argumentum ad ignorantiam? Remember to distinguish between 1. Default truth value of a proposition: Unknown t...

A Buddhist monk once told me this: Question: Is there a self? Buddhism: Neither yes nor no!!! Analyze that! Epistemological/Ontological stance? Unknow...

:ok:

Hypothetical consent is possible and permissible provided that it be dealt with the utmost delicacy. We can be informed of what a person's value set i...

@"Bartricks" I was wrong, a thousand apologies. Hypothetical consent is possible. One simply has to put oneself in the other person's shoes! I recall,...

You're contradicting yourself. First you affirm it isn't (always) possible to know what someone wants and then, second you deny that very position by ...

If your method of thinking for someone else isn't going to cover all the bases, it's as good as not having a method at all, si? Each case would need t...

:up: That's the fatal flaw in your argument, oui?

The Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) is, as of yet, unproven. It's simply a rule-of-thumb; useful, yes, but true/false, a different story.

:up: I've always been drawn to that idea. I even went so far as to conjecture that we're going to rendezvous with a habitable planet in (say) another ...

:ok: :ok: Problemo! If Rachel has a different set of values, you wouldn't be able to give/withhold consent on her behalf. One man's meat is another ma...

:chin:

Genetic mutation (re X-men, Marvel Comics)

In a sense, true, atheism is invalid because it commits the argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy (theists can't prove God; "thus" God doesn't exist).

My point is that the method employed in re accepting/rejecting a proposal matters to hypothetical consent. One thing's for sure - it involves an exami...

What enables exploitation? Profit mentality most probably. One way of maximizing profits is to underpay workers and that's exploitation, oui?

Interesting!

How do we consent? Most people believe that the first step is to do a cost-benefit analysis (weigh the pros and cons). This, prima facie, seems genera...

:ok:

:ok:

:chin:

My understanding of your Enformationism Thesis is basically this: As far as we, h. sapiens, and also other beings with more or less the same level of ...

I can't. I'm using my cell phone; the book's on my laptop. I'll post some snippets from it when I next use my laptop.

Old habits die hard.

Indeed, this is one of the many instances when the mind/brain is at war with itself. I sometimes feel that our brains/minds have installed on them a s...

Creation Loop 1. X can create Y 2. Y can create X Step 1: X creates Y Step 2: Y creates X Loop through steps 1 and 2. X, in a sense, creates itself; s...

Anatta. :chin: What is it exactly that's wallowing in ennui? Pessimism would mean our worst fears would be realized. What's worse than finding out you...

:ok:

My pleasure.

Philosophy A Visual Encyclopedia

:up: A frisson of excitement passed through me when I realized how similar relativism/anekantavada is to a trivial system of logic that allows contrad...

When driving, one must look in front to avoid accidents. Where we're headed seems more critical to our well-being than where we came from, oui? P. S. ...

Then 'tis time to study/analyze the German mind! Are Germans cuckoo? :chin: They seem to churn out one Nobel Laureate after another, confounding facto...

@"Banno" Every statement is true. Ex falso quodlibet. A trivial logic.

Unlike computers which can generate self-reports, humans can't or if they attempt to, it all comes out wrong.

Muchas gracias for a sample of Heidegger. One needs to be extra cautious when diagnosing incoherence in translations though - much is lost in translat...

While others have given valuable tips on how to wield a pen like a pro, I'm more interested in what some here identify as incoherent speech/writing wh...

:up: :clap: I'm currently reading a children's book on philosophy. The writing is incredibly clear and to the point. From what I can gather, it ain't ...