Artemis

Yes, I am assuming the very much established definition of a common word. I realize I'm pointing out the obvious. You're the one trying to redefine th...

There is no one way to do philosophy, as long as all of those ways include thinking deeply about some aspect of ontology, epistemology, and axiology (...

If your point only is that academia has disciplines labeled "philosophy" and "biology," then yeah, that's true. My point is, that this is like the wor...

You're going to have to elaborate more clearly than that.

All ideas are our ideas. They cannot exist apart from cogent beings.

So you agree with me.

I assume the idea of it exists. That does not mean the Ding an sich exists.

If something IS just an idea, then it can by definition not be more than our thinking.

You're just all over the place. I can't know something that is just an idea? If something is just an idea, then all it IS is what we KNOW about it.

For the love....I call troll.

I know what Santa Claus is, doesn't mean he exists....

Sigh. And we're right back where we started. Again, let's just agree to disagree. I'd prefer not to repeat myself ad infinitum.

The philosophy department through which I got my degree frequently did dual courses, sometimes even taught by two professors. And my philosophy profes...

You say the sciences are not sub-disciplines of philosophy. (Something about a narrow versus broad sense?) I say they are.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Yeah, I can see that. That's just like saying biology is not science because it has it's own identity...

All words are invented. And just cause it may be applied inappropriately too frequently doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Remember when people were jokin...

Speak for yourself! :rofl: :flower:

Probably cause it's located somewhere NW of Siberia!

Fun fact, the "division" between philosophers and scientists is a historically relatively new development. Back in ye olden days, they were considered...

Ah, and how do you distinguish those two things?

Well, you're doing it right here! :razz:

Usefulness? I was thinking that's just the way it is. Like, what's the use of calling all green, red, and yellow apples fruit? It's just the way it is...

Philosophy entertains me all the time. But that's not it's purpose. Non-theoretical science is applied philosophy. Philosophy in action.

Gotta say, I'm loving "The Good Place."

I'd say that makes you a more introspective and honest person than the majority of humans. It's a good thing. Go with it and cultivate that. In the lo...

Yes, I think science is a sub-discipline of philosophy. I think it's (almost?) entirely philosophical though in way that baseball is not. Science seek...

I think philosophy is any kind of serious inquiry and analysis. Not all thoughts are philosophy. "I'm hungry" or "I forgot to schedule my annual denta...

No. A bowl of porridge is not philosophy. But you can philosophize about it.

You can philosophize about anything and everything. There are things which may be too trivial to want to philosophize about.

The scientific method is a philosophical approach to getting knowledge about the physical world that presupposes the laws of logic, naturalism, and un...

Every scientist is using philosophy for establishing empirical data. The scientific method IS philosophy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_history

To say that things are by degrees unknown is to say that some of it is known. Like I said, you have to have to start from somewhere. But, yeah, seeing...

All of humanity who ask questions and probe the depths and limits of human knowledge are philosophers. If by "objective" you actually mean "absolute" ...

No we don't have to have a definition of a rock to espy a rock. But we have to have one in order to talk with each other about it. Even if we want to ...

Thank you :smile:

Yes, but we have to have that definition first.

Genuinely new? Probably not. But that's beside the point. Discovery of a thing that exists in the world isn't gonna happen in a theoretical discussion...

That really doesn't make a lick of sense. How would you be able to determine whether something exists if you're not quite sure what it is? Quick, tell...

Crickets.... Lol, JK. I'm getting my popcorn ready on the off-chance that forum members aren't tired of this conversation yet.

Misanthropic. But I do trust that the mods will back me up if someone becomes actually belligerent. I honestly don't take nastiness from internet stra...

Thank you! :heart:

Personally, I engage with individuals up until the point that they can no longer be respectful. I try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. I'm o...

I agree that's a recurring issue on philosophy fora (is that the correct plural?). I'm not sure what the solution is though. Outright banning it seems...

I think you got the questions backwards. First ask, what is it, and then you can assess whether ot exists. My personal take: Supernatural spirits: by ...

Yes! This one gets it :grin:

I think it is, but whatever. The point is that e may not be a necessary condition of Fism. And if you attribute it to an Fist anyway, you need to make...

So maybe I had the general bilateral symmetry required for e and decided I'd rather have f or g or h. Anything but e! E is the worst.

Yes, a fine example of tact and diplomacy.