schopenhauer1

Either, both. Schopenhauer, Hegel, the proceeding Existentialists, the absurdists, the Platonists, the realists, all might have a different view than ...

Head nod.... :smile:

I think this restates my point quite succinctly.. Thanks for sharing it!

@"Wayfarer"@"Count Timothy von Icarus" I'll leave you with this for now.. (I'll be back though).. Is there any other philosopher, who you can quite do...

@"Count Timothy von Icarus" Dang, this Rorty essay is the gift that keeps on giving...

Absolutely!

@"Tom Storm" Is there a part where it talks about Wittgenstein admonishing Wittgenstein's adherents? This comes to mind: https://www.youtube.com/short...

@"Count Timothy von Icarus" Damn, I don't know how it is I can agree and disagree with someone so much, as I do in that Rorty passage you quoted. I ag...

Well, this thread is how people use Wittgenstein.. And one part of that "arsenal" is exactly the idea that Wittgenstein "didn't want to participate" l...

:lol: Nah go ahead.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF-oEPkjFJk&t=3s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SCytV0ssAU

Oh god.. please, don't (ironically unironically) turn into the thing we are discussing.. You too will become the borg/zombie/fanboy....

:razz: And I find it interesting that "Facts" and "State of Affairs" are just taken as givens, thus stated.. As if you make your sentences stark enoug...

Maybe I misinterpreted you, but the mentality that "Witt had it right and we now have to dance around figuring out the right interpretation of the gre...

I think it is a good idea that if you are opposed to an idea to be able to explain what it is you are opposed to. This can be instructive as much as e...

How would the discussion be meaningless?

Thanks for the link! As for the other comments- fascinating! Can you explain more how this idea of Goodness relates to the Wittgenstein thing? I just ...

Then I guess I did not understand what you meant by the coin flip comment. Can you elaborate?

No, it is THIS mentality (in the background of explaining Wittgenstein's ideas) that is the source of much of this...

Exqueeze me? I thought you were characterizing me views here: And I thus elaborated on it here: And now you are saying you have no idea what I am sayi...

Eek.. I don't even want to know, honestly.. That in itself will devolve into who can show off how much Wittgenstein is beyond really "knowing"...

:up:

The "mental floss" made me chuckle :smile:. Indeed I tend to think the first about Tractatus and the second about PI. I think this gets into tricky te...

I have no problem with this or that approach to philosophy. That is not my problem. It is HOW specifically Wittgenstein is often employed.

Yeah, I don't like Heidegger as a person.. so hard for me to "defend" anything here with his political affiliations.. a POS in that regard, but it see...

:lol: :smile:

Now we are ACTUALLY debating Wittgenstein.. This is more of a meta-thread on HOW PEOPLE debate Wittgenstein.. We can debate Wittgenstein, but I fear d...

:wink: Notice here, there is a sort of asymmetry which is good, but not assumed by the Witt fan: Debater A believes when Wittgenstein claims/makes ref...

Interesting..Care to elaborate?

THIS I agree with. But when one tries to treat philosophy as an activity and engages with people who treat it as rather static doctrine that can only ...

Wow, this is an excellent response and analysis with specific examples. Good job! :up: :smirk: Oh god, how many times is this going to be dragged out ...

I see this as playing with words. There is a reason why "war" is different than a fight between individuals. It's "conflict" and "violent", but it's n...

I think you are getting closer to it.. The aphoristic style lends itself to people reading it like a prophet.. holy writ almost. And again, Nietzsche'...

:smirk:

Ok. I just don't understand why Wittgenstein seems peculiarly treated like a prophet who one must just "read better" rather than one can have a critiq...

There's a lot of complex philosophers...

I mean... :yikes:

No not at all, I am in a thread on Schopenhauer right now, for example.. I don't think I am "gatekeeping" it. Gatekeeping is deciding who gets to part...

:up:

For fuck's sake :roll: .. No answer.. What I thought.

No because everything I say is liable to be said, "Thus interpreted wrong.. so I am not going to communicate with you". I commented on your summary of...

This is my problem with this kind of CIRCLE JERKING thread.. Just KNOWING the premise of the Tractatus doesn't impute that it is RIGHT.

In your estimation, unless you agree with most of the Tractatus' premises, you cannot have a discussion. What a dick way to go about this forum.

Ah, an elitist. School me, bro... Use Tractatus to prove Tractatus and show me.

"Moving forward" implies you don't want a discussion. Is it because you find my commentary distasteful or you just don't like the point of a forums.. ...

So I cannot comment on your thread on an topic in the main part of the forum?

Is the world of facts only propositions of natural science? Why would it be so? Um, it's not a fact (empirically valid), it is a statement about empir...

I'm not sure if @"Mww" is trying to convey this but.. Noumena is a speculative notion that are the "objects-themselves" or the "things-in-themselves" ...

This doesn't make sense though. First off, this statement itself is a metaphysical statement of the world.. one regarding metaphysics relationship wit...

True! I was being cheeky there because it seems that every time there is some contradiction or paradox in Schopenhauer's Will, a Sanskrit and/or Pali ...

It's nonsense to speak of nonsense, because it is precisely defining what "is" that we are doing, and thus, what is legitimate for there to have a "se...