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

AmadeusD

Comments

I hear your point (i think) and that's reasonable... But what i quoted seems to contradict, and place this effort in the 'not-human' category. Unsure ...
January 08, 2024 at 22:27
Ok, so I need to read Kastrup. I did not know about the analogy with pipes/water but I already felt the way the intended intuition about pipes/water a...
January 08, 2024 at 22:18
If you 'listen between the lines', he makes this point himself. Even with reference to Ras.
January 08, 2024 at 22:09
To inject myself here, I'd say Kant IS alive in 1776.
January 08, 2024 at 22:08
Hey mate - would you mind bumper-stickering your basic reasoning here? I am an anti-natalist and so am interested in objections - particularly as you'...
January 08, 2024 at 22:06
Really? I find that hard to parse from the material you've quoted. What? A further, what? Getting into 'wtf' territory... This sounds like the need yo...
January 08, 2024 at 22:02
I'm not suggesting there is. I don't think there's any need to overcome anxiety about life and death. It's also part of human behaviour. Of course, so...
January 08, 2024 at 21:51
Unhinged is a bit far, but as someone who has a closet full of three-pieces and pride myself on my style, he's a total clown in this regard. Looks utt...
January 08, 2024 at 21:48
Huh. This seems to apply to a 'large middle' of humans while assuming positivism. Both seem aspects seem a bit shaky to me. I don't think its reasonab...
January 08, 2024 at 21:47
Agreed - if not clear, JPB made the comments that get my back up.
January 08, 2024 at 21:18
Great image!
January 08, 2024 at 21:02
:ok:
January 08, 2024 at 20:52
Any other NZers on here?
January 08, 2024 at 20:32
Im not seeing a connection between (6.) and (7.). We can only conclude that it is from (6.). However, the above is very helpful in terms of supporting...
January 08, 2024 at 20:21
:ok: Noted
January 08, 2024 at 20:18
You mean the comments about psychedelics? Yeah, it was really weird to see. It's even weirder that his nemesis (Harris) is actually well-versed and re...
January 08, 2024 at 20:14
I don't see how we can do that..
January 08, 2024 at 20:02
This is true, and a serious problem for discussions of time as currently being explored. But this doesn't mean 'time doesn't exist'. It means are symb...
January 08, 2024 at 19:57
(yes, there's some incredulity in this question) Are you seriously comparing 'ethical views' to the reality of categories of triangle? (response to fi...
January 08, 2024 at 19:52
Interesting question. In my experience, 'good looking' people are less nice.. to me. But that's almost certainly a bias about my desires. I would say ...
January 08, 2024 at 19:48
He makes some extremely unfounded comments about psychedelic experiences. This was where i started to lose it with his sophistry because it's unhelpfu...
January 08, 2024 at 19:32
Yes. I am 'atheist' in relation to the rock. I do not commit one way or the other. Yet.... Prima facie, No. No i shouldn't. And prima facie, these abo...
January 08, 2024 at 19:21
I think this is what maters. We are what McKenna called 'the moving wave-front of eternity'. We're at the front of the line, and as such, we are somew...
January 08, 2024 at 18:59
What is your belief? No guff, or argumentation to come - Just ascertaining everyone's positions as it's often hard to grok from the exchanges i observ...
January 08, 2024 at 03:28
Thanks mate. Ryle is about half-way down my hit list currently - Just jumped a few spots.
January 08, 2024 at 03:24
Very active, and will continue to be. But yes, very new I've recently found out :P I am also, for 'context of me' starting my Philosophy BA as a conjo...
January 08, 2024 at 03:20
Right, right. Ok, cool thank you!
January 08, 2024 at 03:16
A-theism means A-theism.
January 08, 2024 at 03:16
What's the sitch when the information is in transit?
January 08, 2024 at 02:58
Opiates too. And Benzos
January 08, 2024 at 02:27
As a pre-amble, i'm glad to see this. I see no obstacle in Gettier problems due to the justification criterion. I find the italicised pretty odd. What...
January 08, 2024 at 02:02
You can do both. Whenever I encounter someone who is (to my mind) misusing these words, i ascertain their position and then ascribe what appears to me...
January 08, 2024 at 00:17
There's my weeks delve. Anyone else you'd append for someone to explore?
January 07, 2024 at 23:46
Oh, interesting. As a new addition i had no idea there were prior iterations. Neat! What a great little community.
January 07, 2024 at 21:59
I believe these were intended as two separate attributes. It is long. And it provides no insight. Could be wrong, but that seems the case to me.
January 07, 2024 at 21:17
Yes, I would say its fairly safe that when people are clearly affectatious in their presentation can be judged on it :P
January 07, 2024 at 21:04
is this a 'constant conjunction' thing? My experience has been the inverse..
January 07, 2024 at 20:40
Ahh ok, lol all good. Thank you
January 07, 2024 at 19:59
Sorry, as this is entirely off-topic, but what... Do you know each other IRL, or have been following each other across the internet since the Nineties...
January 07, 2024 at 19:51
I am having trouble with the plum disregard for what these words actually mean. Obviously, you're not hte culprit. But a-theism has a meaning. A-gnost...
January 07, 2024 at 19:50
I agree. Words are not morals. I guess the issue here, though, is that substantial scholarly work indicates that the use of words (particularly protra...
January 07, 2024 at 19:28
righteous :wink:
January 07, 2024 at 01:49
Ah you seem to just be here for a conflict now. This is inaccurate. Your arguments are based on inaccuracies. I pointed these out and you did not addr...
January 07, 2024 at 01:47
No. No it wasn’t. These are th positions. And the actual atheists of the world know this. You can’t te them what their view is. And the citation has b...
January 07, 2024 at 01:42
No. I adequately showed you position to be entirely incorrect viz a viz the definition and use of the two terms and if you looked at the etymologies t...
January 07, 2024 at 00:59
Err nope. Arguing against the likelihood of something does not require knowledge that it “isn’t”. Your misinterpretations are starting to seem trollis...
January 06, 2024 at 23:15
oh my. This is unfortunate. You are wrong in your definitions and I see no reason to entertain arguments based on them :) take care mate
January 06, 2024 at 23:13
No it isnt. You’re wrong and I’m trying to explain it as simply as possible - but you’re literally ignoring the fact that your definitions are wrong. ...
January 06, 2024 at 23:01
:ok:
January 06, 2024 at 22:55
What? No it isn’t. That’s entirely non sequitur. It’s a lack of knowledge of the existence of God/s. It is neutral. It is not a decision. It is in fac...
January 06, 2024 at 22:50