Angelo Cannata

Once we realize that the Bible cannot be considered entirely faithful to historical facts, the next step is to analyze it, word by word, sentence by s...

Because the very concepts of "perfect" and "consistent" are far from being perfect and consistent, because we are unable to assess them without using ...

You wrote that 90 or 99% of people will carry on looking for a meaning. As a consequence, you should agree that, by posing your question, you have aut...

You cannot know what is real from a philosophical perspective, because the words used in the philosophical question "What is real?" were born in an ab...

Yes, essentially I am a relativist / skeptic / postmodern, although I have got some criticism against these positions as well.

Some criterions may be helpful for this problem and discussion. The Bible is not a 100% faithful recording of what really happened, what people really...

I think that an element that makes Sartre's reasoning incorrect is the implicit assumption that it is possible to make a clean-cut distinction between...

I think Sartre was wrong in considering something as absolute just because it is at a stage that precedes thinking. Before thinking there are structur...

A lot of people in the world, we can even say everybody in the world, continuously, all the time, is in such situations of difficult choices. I think ...

It seems to me that all these positions have a mistake in common: they assume as a starting point, even if just hypothetical, some metaphisical views....

Obviously there are impaired people, medical cases, about whom we can even have scientific evidence that they are unable to reach certain kinds and le...

I was going to give my answer, but actually you did it: Physically we are all able to get access to any degree of wisdom, we are all humans. The probl...

About protecting something, you made me remember that both in religions and in ancient philosophy we find an interest to keep certain knowledge secret...

I agree with you, but I think there is a degree of truth in what you quoted, although it is not the truth that is commonly considered. The idea you qu...

We can consider that even psychologists need to make use of the word “selfishness” because, as you said, there is no better word. But their context ma...

I think the concept of compassion only apparently makes things clear about selfishness. Apparently, it makes things clear because we can describe it a...

I think that selfishness shows just a need that some people have to judge other people, or even themselves, as selfish. “Selfish” does never say anyth...

One reason why you can’t make sense might be your definition of selfishness: Not having emotional resonance, or even intentionally ignoring it, does n...

I think the idea of happiness is not useful to address problems, because you can never tell if you are really happy: somebody under the effects of alc...

Why should you believe? You try to protect yourself from beliefs induced by society and governments, by trying to critically define what you should be...

Yes, of course we cannot speak without using the verb to be. But this does not imply that we must have a strongly clear idea about its meaning.

This is too easy a way to defend any argumentation. Normally philosophers do the opposite: instead of trying to support their arguments with others’ i...

I don’t think that questioning our understanding of “to be” is equivalent to say that communication is impossible. We don’t need to assume that we hav...

If philosophy is unable to mention one single thing that it has been able to understand about the world, I don’t think that assessing my competence wi...

One essential criticism about Descartes’ “I think, therefore I am” is that we have no idea about what “to be” or “to exist” means. The same applies to...

Is there at least one single thing that philosophy has been able to understand of the world, able to withstand criticism?

Ideas that pretend to be able to withstand any criticism.

What I said is not about any problem because of repeating Descartes. The problem is in being exposed to the same criticism which Descartes was exposed...

We can't assume that the world exists, because we have no idea of what "exist" means.

:smile: I think the point is not about liking Descartes or not. The point is that Descartes carried on in this human desire of finding something stron...

I think you are right and you have touched a very important point in philosophy. This is my intepretation of what happened: - phylosophical systems of...

What you said looks like a complex, hidden, tricky way, of just reviving Descartes’ “I think, therefore I am”. If not, what is the difference between ...

"... a list of key ideas from various philosophies that promote a real eudaimonic way of living". I have been thinking about something similar in last...

I could say exactly the same, but I don't, because it looks like a way to avoid the responsibility of giving explanation. It is easy to say "you don't...

So, you are both admitting that you are not giving the word “absolute” the meaning given in philosophy. This means that this discussion is not meant t...

It’s not pedantry, it is just philosophy. In philosophy the word “absolute” means really “absolute”, does not mean “approximately absolute”.

In short, it seems that, when you say “absolute”, you actually mean something like “absolute, but not too much”, “absolute, but not too absolute, not ...

I think they actually have not been able to answer the question: all things mentioned in the answers as absolute things aren’t absolute at all.

Your question is a mixture of contradictions that make impossible any answer. They are all contradictions between the concept of “absolute” and the de...

Hello, rossii, a "compelling" reason/argument to live and how to live does not exist: every reason/argument is relative. This means that being pessimi...

I am happy to see that your framework has a lot of similarities with my idea of a spiritual path, that I described in detail in my book Walking, freel...

Given that, as you said, it is unexplainable, 1) how do you know that what you called “Everything” is really “Everything”, 2) how do you know that it ...

Aristotle was undeniably a very intelligent person. How didn't he realize that his argument can be turned against him, mentally closed to question thi...

This doesn't remove the problem I showed in the paradox.

You cannot find an answer because, as you wrote in the title, it is metaphysics and, as such, it contains the same error that is common to all metaphy...

On the contrary, this is exactly what science is and what makes it different from philosophy. When, for example, science says that the earth is a plan...

The dynamics of faith is supposed to be slightly different: in Christian theology the decision to believe is never the first step. The first step is a...

This is a misunderstanding of how witness and testimony are meant in the context of Christianity. They are not meant like objective or scientific evid...

You confirmed what I said: if those who talk are expert people, you are not interested in considering their flaws: it is like you think “They are expe...

It looks like you aren’t even so much interested in understanding the problems contained in the topic: for you what is enough is that they have expert...