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

ff0

Comments

I'm happy to find this thought discussed by someone else. Yes, it's when the 'why' targets existence as a whole that it reveals itself to be a lyrical...
December 11, 2017 at 20:57
The problem is perhaps with the book chosen. For experts, the PoS seems to contain at leat the seed of everything. That's what I've read. But I usuall...
December 11, 2017 at 20:46
Perhaps 'actual' science is not an ideology. But the word 'science' is IMV massively entangled in ideology. See the quote below. I don't think 'scienc...
December 11, 2017 at 20:39
Yeah, that sounds pretty good. I don't know MP, but I know Nietzsche well and have a fondness for early Heidegger (pre B&T) who comes to mind as I rea...
December 11, 2017 at 20:29
Right. But my point is that this way of talking about things ('exists unperceived') is (to my mind) something like an artificial game that rests on 'p...
December 11, 2017 at 20:18
I agree. There's no necessary leap there, as far as I can see. I do however reject materialism in the name of a sort of higher materialism. Why? Becau...
December 11, 2017 at 20:10
Good point. I vote that it's an ontological one that 'needs to be dissolved.' Or rather it's dissolved as soon as a thinker differently understands hi...
December 11, 2017 at 19:54
Yeah. I like Kaufmann's better. I was hoping not to have to type out the quotes. Right. But I'd personally put stress on what we can make of it for ou...
December 11, 2017 at 19:48
What I like about this is its focus on emotion. It's the idea of something that will not be moved with tears, prayers, flattery. It is the real that r...
December 11, 2017 at 11:04
If I can interrupt and answer with a sincere joke, I think not having an ideology looks like corpse. And maybe there's also the question of what we ar...
December 11, 2017 at 10:54
Right. What does it mean symbolically when a God becomes man? https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/feuerbach/works/essence/ec04.htm
December 11, 2017 at 10:42
Thanks for the kind response. Rereading my post, I see that I liked the opportunity of stressing the tonal, interpersonal element of conversation. Tha...
December 11, 2017 at 04:45
To me the problem is in what we ask of distinctions like physical and non-physical. We have vague but functional idea of the meaning of this distincti...
December 11, 2017 at 04:34
I agree with you on that point. There's no escape from responsibility in 'in my opinion.' You're right that I was taking you out of context. That was ...
December 11, 2017 at 04:29
I must disagree here. Not everyone is so theoretical! Some people just don't go to church, don't pray, don't expect help from secret sources. They won...
December 11, 2017 at 04:28
I say yes. We 'look down' on ourselves. As we age we become more sophisticated, more sensitive to all the different ways that humans can be beautiful....
December 11, 2017 at 04:13
If I may interject, not exactly! In my opinion, 'in my opinion' is often added to stress that one is well aware that others may disagree. I suggest th...
December 11, 2017 at 04:06
Ah, yes, Jung. I read lots of Jung at one time. Great stuff. What I like especially is the idea of errors accumulating to become truth. We become rich...
December 11, 2017 at 03:50
I like this. It reminds me of https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Vocation_of_Man/Part_1 According to the one, I am wholly independent of Nature and of...
December 11, 2017 at 03:12
Good point. And the abstract idea of determinism is swamped by the burden of having a choice to make, by the experience of 'illusory' freedom. We act ...
December 11, 2017 at 03:03
That seems plausible. Isn't this idea in the Vedanta, too? If memory serves, there's an old idea of God playing hide-and-go-seek with himself. In any ...
December 11, 2017 at 02:43
Yes. Very well put. I follow you well here. We can't behind the logos completely. I think 'factic life' is a one name of this impossible target --the ...
December 11, 2017 at 02:41
But why isn't all the more surprising that there are infinitely many? One of the anti-metaphysical axes I like to grind is a sort of smugness that I f...
December 11, 2017 at 02:21
Only some of him! But some of these passages are glorious. His 'feel' is grand, lofty. I have this book. It's one of my favorite Hegel books. We could...
December 11, 2017 at 01:48
In my experience, there is here and there a metaphysical theist on philosophy forums. I was trying to make clear that my mention of the limits of scie...
December 11, 2017 at 01:37
Yes, I agree that non-philosophers accept realism as a true, in a sort of unconscious way. Indeed, I think we all think some kind of 'primordial' real...
December 11, 2017 at 01:16
I confess that I may read all of these guys idiosyncratically. It's been awhile since I've read Wittgenstein. I had what I'd call a sort of insight or...
December 11, 2017 at 01:12
Indeed. I've definitely tried to stir up some feely foolosophy. For me that's foolosophy at its best: life and death, love and loss, a brave and/or wi...
December 11, 2017 at 00:55
I opine that existential time is not a mathematical continuum. If it were, then the present would have 'measure zero.' But then how could you read thi...
December 11, 2017 at 00:38
Good points. Hegel is amazingly clear in some texts and annoying obscure in others. My current view, however, is that he did have a grudge against 'my...
December 11, 2017 at 00:32
All good points. What's interesting to me is that an investment in the superiority or priority of logic is still 'irrational' in a certain sense. We t...
December 11, 2017 at 00:23
Ah yes, I love both those guys. Early Heidegger and late Wittgenstein. I've been experimenting with not referencing them, just to see what I could do ...
December 11, 2017 at 00:14
Well, I can relate. But this satisfaction is pragmatic/emotional, as I see it. For the most part we react to threats and chase promises in nature. We ...
December 10, 2017 at 09:23
For me it would be both creating new interpretations and new events, by word and deed respectively. Though one might say that speech is a sort of acti...
December 10, 2017 at 09:18
Why does the sun evaporate the water? You can invoke still other entities, still other projected necessities. Maybe we can go all the way back to the ...
December 10, 2017 at 09:12
Typically one highlights what one is responding to here and a quote button will appear. Then it becomes clear who you are speaking to and they get a n...
December 10, 2017 at 09:01
That's a good point. A self-righteous self-declared accidental ape. Why should science or reason be holy or sacred under such assumptions? The positio...
December 10, 2017 at 08:55
I completely agree. For that reason I find 'mechanical' or dry, theoretical approaches to what we ought to do troubling. The individual as such is the...
December 10, 2017 at 08:44
True. I would add that we largely find certain options already rejected. They are dead for us on impact. Ruled out. Right away we reach for a refutati...
December 10, 2017 at 08:33
Hi. I've enjoyed your posts and this thread as a whole. I just thought I'd chime in to stress that (in my view) ordinary language is not metaphysical....
December 10, 2017 at 08:30
In my view, we work with a persuasive speech that is both logical and feeling-tinged. For instance, I might ask you what it is for logos to convince l...
December 10, 2017 at 08:21
I agree. But I think everyone agrees. To deny such a world in conversation is nevertheless to try to say something true about a shared situation. This...
December 10, 2017 at 07:50
I guess this depends on what you take for an explanation. If I can take some concepts and numbers and build a reliable prediction machine, that's grea...
December 10, 2017 at 07:48
Interesting point, but doesn't this assume that time is like the real number line? What if existential time is deeper than mathematically conceived ph...
December 10, 2017 at 07:33
Yes, I like 'gherkin jerkin.' I had to look gherkin up, but I had a sense of what to expect. I think you nailed it in terms of the arrogance. If philo...
December 10, 2017 at 07:30
My pleasure. Thanks for yours. Yes, I relate to that. Actually we're more on the same page than it may appear. The philosophy with respect to which I ...
December 10, 2017 at 07:20
I relate to your general approach. You mention linguistic pragmatism elsewhere in your post. For that gets it right. Besides the subject-object dualis...
December 10, 2017 at 06:58
Thanks. I like your OP. I've seen others resent the question, but to me it's a very philosophical question. I scratch out the word because lots of wis...
December 10, 2017 at 04:39
Hi. I don't claim any authority on the Tao, but I'd like to provide another way of thinking of it. Instead of the 'still-too-theoretical' idea of obje...
December 10, 2017 at 04:04
I think I can relate to your position in the post above. For lack of a better word, there's a kind of theoretical pose or sense of what one is about t...
December 09, 2017 at 22:50