You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

S

Comments

No, I think that I could have left out the talk about the origins of language, and in hindsight, maybe I should have. What I'm trying to get at is dee...
February 28, 2019 at 10:32
I'm only human? Sorry I'm not perfect. You do know I'm only playing around when I say otherwise, right?
February 28, 2019 at 10:27
Fine. As you would put it, I was "playing extremely fast and loose with 'invent', 'agree' etc.". Just as there's a bad way to interpret what Rousseau ...
February 28, 2019 at 10:23
If you lend me £50,000, I promise you I'll buy back the old forum. I definitely won't blow it all on drugs, hookers, fast cars, and partying.
February 28, 2019 at 10:17
You're sure that my acknowledgment that a number of comments on the last few pages, amongst those of pretty clear philosophical value, is actually an ...
February 28, 2019 at 09:34
No, you're definitely not unnecessary. On the contrary. You're too modest. Just look at Baden's comments. He said something along the lines that no on...
February 28, 2019 at 08:53
Let's look at some evidence, not that it will do any good, because they'll never admit they're wrong in any respect, which ironically they see as one ...
February 28, 2019 at 08:43
Makes sense to me. Why don't they just go with what makes sense and resolve the problem? I think I'm noticing a general link between problems and over...
February 28, 2019 at 00:12
If you begin a game of proper chess and you start moving the pieces in whichever ways you like, then you'll be disqualified. You aren't playing the ga...
February 28, 2019 at 00:01
It is a peculiar phenomenon known as thinking like a philosopher. It can be a symptom of ill health. Caution advised. Therapy may be necessary. Progno...
February 27, 2019 at 23:34
If a bear does not shit in the woods...
February 27, 2019 at 23:23
I agree. To some extent, anyway.
February 27, 2019 at 23:22
There's a scale of severity in getting things wrong, and that matters, as does how reversible it is. I suppose at least with a discussion closure, it'...
February 27, 2019 at 23:17
Anyway, it's not about the message it sends. Look, just imagine if it was me instead of Baden, because I suspect you may be biased here. You're tellin...
February 27, 2019 at 23:02
Big surprise there. So, what now, if I want to continue discussion of the philosophical topic in a way which would meet the approval of the likes of y...
February 27, 2019 at 22:54
I actually agree with this, even including my own shit, and so long as it is not the entire discussion or valuable comments of mine. And if it's just ...
February 27, 2019 at 22:42
This isn't about my personal character, though. I didn't ask, "Hey guys! What do you think of my personal character?". This is about abuse of power. I...
February 27, 2019 at 22:36
I never said that it was all philosophy. I'm not denying the off topic comments. Nevertheless, there was an ongoing worthwhile philosophical discussio...
February 27, 2019 at 22:30
It's dangerous to even suggest the deletion tool if the closure tool is being abused. That would just scale up the problem.
February 27, 2019 at 22:16
I would like to hear from @"Janus" and @"ZhouBoTong" on that. They're less likely to be biased against me than others in that discussion. Also, @"Marc...
February 27, 2019 at 22:09
Practically all discussions here involve repetitive entrenchments of positions, insulting remarks, and bad jokes. You do this yourself. Especially the...
February 27, 2019 at 22:00
You should know as well as I do that that's not the case. At the very least, your comment is a disgraceful exaggeration.
February 27, 2019 at 21:52
We had a good laugh at this at work today when I relayed the conversation to my colleagues.
February 27, 2019 at 20:49
Okay, so you want me to spoonfeed you the answer. You could have just said that. I did it on purpose to show that I reject his funny way of speaking. ...
February 27, 2019 at 20:43
That's a brilliant first line of a first reply. In fact, the rest of your reply is pretty brilliant, too. :lol: :up: I wish more people here would una...
February 27, 2019 at 20:27
So I'm culpable for your failure to think outside of the box?
February 27, 2019 at 20:22
No, that wasn't in reply to a question. :lol:
February 27, 2019 at 20:20
You'd rather I spoonfeed you the answer straightaway than give you an opportunity to reconsider?
February 27, 2019 at 20:19
Do you understand that missing what I was purposefully doing there only reflects badly on you? Try thinking outside of the box. And this isn't a popul...
February 27, 2019 at 20:10
Oh noes. Please don't go. You make so much sense. Tell me more about how it is that rocks don't exist, and up is down, and the sea is the sky. I love ...
February 27, 2019 at 20:00
It would amount to acting in disconformity, and it would likely result in miscommunication, and it would have the kind of consequences which you inevi...
February 27, 2019 at 19:41
I refuse to talk in your funny way, with your funny distinction. Rocks are just rocks. That's all of them, so just pick any. That doesn't follow from ...
February 27, 2019 at 19:31
"Kwed"?
February 27, 2019 at 19:24
Just rocks. If you weren't suggesting that they magically change, then what was your point? They are what they are. I've told you what they are. No it...
February 27, 2019 at 19:14
If you can't recognise an extraordinary claim as an extraordinary claim, then you're extraordinary yourself. I don't believe that you're extraordinary...
February 27, 2019 at 18:53
Rocks. There isn't any valid logical connection between your first sentence and your question. Your first sentence is logically irrelevant. And you wo...
February 27, 2019 at 18:19
I don't know why you're saying it like that and talking as though you're not one yourself. And it's interesting how your drink snobbery matches your p...
February 27, 2019 at 17:31
Yes. And? You weren't meaning to disagree with me there, were you?
February 27, 2019 at 17:01
Wait, you don't seriously deny that there are rules of chess, do you? If the analogy is apt, then there are rules. There are consequences for not foll...
February 27, 2019 at 17:00
It's like an unwritten rule. You hold your lighter up during slow songs at a concert. You either play along or you don't. You don't have to play chess...
February 27, 2019 at 16:28
Janus is right. Behavioural patterns can be evidence of rule following. His examples are plausible and make sense. The explanation works.
February 27, 2019 at 16:13
That was a question, not an argument. I wanted to explore that avenue of thought. I don't doubt much of what you say there. Like I said in my other di...
February 27, 2019 at 15:51
Fine, whatever. I was just trying to set the scene. You seem to be taking it a bit too literally. Maybe it's not perfect. So language evolved or magic...
February 27, 2019 at 15:05
:grin: Whoops. It's all me. I'm quoting myself, unattributed. I just liked the formatting. I thought it looked neater like that. Clearer.
February 27, 2019 at 14:53
Alright, enlighten me then, smarty-pants. Gimmie the lowdown.
February 27, 2019 at 14:35
This is what you have a burden to demonstrate without begging the question (as you are wont to do). I have some questions for you. What do you think a...
February 27, 2019 at 14:01
Now fetch me a beer.
February 27, 2019 at 13:44
If you're thinking of Kant here, then yes, he was great. But he is an obstacle, just like Hume was. Just as Kant saw Hume in this way, I see Kant in t...
February 27, 2019 at 13:31
At least you understand where I'm coming from, and accept that this can be a good thing. That's how you see it. The following is how I see it. Here's ...
February 27, 2019 at 12:39
Here is a hand. Gasp! :scream:
February 27, 2019 at 09:35