Fire Ologist

I see what you are saying. That’s where we agree. But I see more than that. And I don’t see it as contradictory. This is what I can’t get you to see. ...

See, I like that. That rings. Truth found must be the same truth for any seeker, or there may be nothing there to be found. Yes. Not my truth. Nor the...

Stipulations are functional, temporary versions of absolutes. But if we never seek to convert one of these stipulations into something that just is, t...

What kind of line would separate being in the middle with being anywhere else (like a start)? There is an absolute difference between middle and start...

Where we are, is already in the middle - neither starting nor at an end. But instead, already using language and reasoning and willing and wondering… ...

Well, no. I’m still trying to figure out why you disagree with me.

Yes. I’d rather call the two anspects 1) analysis of analyzing (logic, language), and 2) analysis of the world (what language is about, why we speak, ...

I started a post titled “Being in the Middle”. Why do you think what we are doing should be called “philosophy”. Are the ends so remote here in the mi...

I love it. That’s philosophy to me. Analysis, but not just analysis of analysis, but also analysis of living in the world or “topics that lie beyond a...

Maybe none?

So… that’s it then.

I could be wrong. What a mess? You seem to have more to say…

I agree with that. Williamson himself didn’t think his essay got any significant philosophic work done and lacked rigor, but I agree - it’s a work for...

That is the intuition. I think I see that it is not valid. Something about 2 and 4 seems tautological so nothing new can be concluded. But… How is ANY...

Everyone seems to be comfortable using the word “better” and understanding what it is intended to add to a conversation. I am saying, by saying and us...

So good philosophy can completely forego the devotion to “ identifying and clarifying consistent/inconsistent and coherent/incoherent relations intern...

Ok. Did you argue that somewhere without positing some absolute?

I agree ‘equality before the law’ is a good political ideal. That’s one whole conversation, about politics and the formation of the relationship betwe...

Yes they did. Directly in response to Amadeus’ post, in an effort to persuade us all with his words (ironically and contradictorily to his position), ...

Banno, J, I know you have moved to some interesting discussion here, but the issues below still seem live to me, and related to where you are now. And...

Yes. No work can be done or progress made if one believes “equal rationality” applies to both sides of any dispute. Rationality may exist on both side...

That is the world I’m interested in. I don’t think the experts in speaking about this half-world are only priests and mystics and poets. I think there...

This whole thread for many pages has been many people trying to get a lightbulb to go off in NOS’s head. If any such light did ever shine, NOS would s...

Yes. Partly because of their cleverness. Untouchable, one might say with admiration.

:up: Or loudly, in the basement of the internet. Amongst themselves. Not yet subsumed, but I suspect only because it still feels impolite.

Does philosophy ever assert what is true about the world? ADDED: Correct assumption. Which makes it true - out in the world, apart from your own model...

If we are basing the question of the OP on a hypothetical, experimental world, then I’m sure we can find that not all of us are bad. But actually, we ...

Or, philosophy is like science with no balls.

When we say to ourselves that we know right from wrong, and then we still do what is wrong, if that is bad, then yes, we are all bad people.

In this context, it’s more accurate to say we’ve all killed ourselves - all are guilty.

Bob, I always feel respected by you without you saying it, so no need. Have at it! I hope you see that Inrespect you as well. That said, reading throu...

Good stuff. As usual, saying what I am trying to say, but more rigorously. @"Bob Ross", I would just add something about method and approach with thes...

You know how when you walk down the street you can’t bump into “13” - it’s a concept only existing in the mind. Numbers painted are shapes and colors,...

Banno, I can see you are being patient with me and I appreciate it. If I sound like I am repeating myself, it is because 1) I don’t think you are seei...

I wasn’t clear. I’m not saying God isn’t a moral agent and that because He is God he gets to do evil and have it not called evil. God has revealed tha...

I’m saying “better” always relies on a “best”. Better exists on a scale of worst to best. You don’t see the better “thing” without knowing the “best” ...

From what I can tell reading your posts you are a good man Bob. An immediate adjustment here is to humbly accept that the above rules apply to you and...

And I think it’s a good one - experiencing art as art is an active participation and a sort of dialogue with the art, where something is planted and s...

‘Seed planting and seed sprouting or not sprouting’ is an analysis of all art. You set up a language game. That’s another game - a lousy one (to the t...

If you would keep the linear constructions of reason and logic, along with the wholistic constructions of intuitive and aesthetic beliefs, all under t...

I agree. What I am saying isn’t crystal clear to me. I need to think on the Battle of the Bands analogy to directly address it and will get back. I th...

I think I am saying for 1 that we show an understanding that there indeed IS an ideal. So this sounds ontological - like some platonic form of the ide...

Good stuff. Curious what Moliere will say. I offered an aesthetic theory of philosophizing that referenced the different questions or angles of approa...

I think I agree there is an equivocation, but it is between ontological (like physical/actual) objects, and their grouping (language-ifying/metaphysic...

That is great. :fire: Linear thinkers versus wholistic thinkers. That’s another aesthetic theory of philosophizing.

Because you keep saying best. We all do. If one is better than the other, then one is best. You don’t see ‘better’ until you see ‘best’. You know a li...

By what you just said above, you don’t mean to say merely that: …but you had to say it anyway to say what you said. Exactly. Banno, you seem to be rej...

But do you at least see why he said that? I know you are aren’t meaning to say it, or meaning to mean that, but you actively avoiding aims, telos-spea...

Could that be simply because it works? We can point to progress in science by using what we learn, so that, who cares that it totalizes and undermines...