schopenhauer1

SO if Trump surrounds himself with assholes and thinks everyone who is against him is an asshole, he is NOT the asshole? I mean let's stick with the T...

I don't understand HOW these things are not connected... Why is it? I contend this. Everything is up for questioning. How unphilosophical. I think it ...

Looking back at that thread.. Damn Streetlight X was an annoying asshole.. I don't care how well-read he was :lol:.

I mean here an ACCOUNT, not just a self-evident conclusion. That seems ANTI-philosophical to just say, "Self-evident" wash one hands and make it the f...

Unless these philosophers explain WHY thought MUST reflect reality (via "logic"), it doesn't seem to have any force to me, except as, ironically, unsu...

Ok, so that is what he is against. What is the theory he is proposing. The name of the book is Thinking and Being... This reminds evokes ideas like He...

I just don't get what the "self-consciousness" aspect adds to it, other than a sort of call to more basic epistemological questions like "How do we ev...

Oh I guess.. and this is just basic.. Because All humans are mortal Socrates is a human Socrates is therefore mortal.. I guess the combining of the ma...

That could still be either one. But I guess the bigger picture here is that Kimhi seems to think Frege is lacking something that say, someone like Ari...

The way I would reply would depend on whether you meant "community" of philosophers/logicians or the general public.

This goes back to my original question, what gives the assertion any truth-value in the first place? Whether you say "This person thinks X is true and...

I'd have to agree here. I think in this sort of thing, we must work backwards and then go from there. For example, if Kimhi is saying something about ...

The problem with all this is it seems very much arguing abstractly.. like we are arguing over something that doesn't seem to have a real "center". WHA...

I don't get why the "judgement stroke" shown at the beginning of the claim matters so much to Kimhi.. What am I not getting.. This is almost the defin...

If this helps, this NYT article seems to summarize pretty nicely Kimhi's main claim:

I mean, I think this actually contradicts your assertion here: Rather, from what I've read so far, it seems Kimhi is trying to say that philosophy has...

I guess my question then is thus: I have a thread about uninteresting philosophies.. My criteria for this is pedantic minutia-mongering and/or it take...

The real-world context of an argument matters. That's the gist of it.

Eh, I probably don't have it, but when I look at it, it looks like Kimhi is accusing Frege of treating something like, "Sky is blue!" no differently i...

Isn't it about judgements of truth versus simply finding the right logical architecture? And if it is about judgements of truth, I would think that th...

So all good stuff here, but my question at hand here is what is the criteria for truth, for Frege or otherwise. We all seem to be circling in agreemen...

To me this just means "context matters". But in almost all instances, it seems when we are saying "true" about a proposition (or by extension a premis...

So this is too much technical parsing.. A "formal argument" having a "valid" conclusion and "sound" premise in many circles would be required for "TRU...

Ok I read @"Banno"'s post. Yes, I think I agree with all he said there as to how emphasis on "truth" has been put aside for emphasis on proper structu...

Ugh, are we Wittgensteining Banno now? I'll let Banno reference himself (I'm waiting for him to copy and paste your text :razz: ).

Isn't this just the difference between validity and soundness? In computer science, for example, all that matters is the structure can be parsed using...

You can correct my summation if you want and transform it from common sense insight to brilliant new revelation that shatters all philosophies. I don’...

Can you explain a bit? Is this more the logical positivists "anti-metaphysics" bent? Yeah, when everything serves a religious end-goal, that does make...

Well, at least there's that.

I mean, I knew that one was coming. I don't see antinatalism as uninteresting, as they don't fit the category of "common sense writ large", nor about ...

Fair enough, but it's more the reasoning, than anything else. Like It's not just that I don't like Wittgenstein because I disagree with him. I actuall...

Prior to learning, the capacities to sense are there. The “place of perception” isn’t just from communal activity. The ability to sense has to be ther...

I’m just saying you need that capacity for senses a priori, the community might shape it, but community alone, without these a priori capacities doesn...

It’s a bit of both. The internal aspect can’t just simply be communal activity. Communal activity activates neural networks, but there’s more to it th...

Yeah I get it, you know the critiques I will say probably, that he is likened unto a "prophet", in this case a "Zen master", and whatnot. And what he ...

@"Banno" I maintain they affectively function the same. There are things "beyond doubt". But as you said with "normative", Kant would place the necess...

Well, he isn’t saying it’s like Kant, and that’s the problem as it is… As for outside experience, I simply mean functions for which propositional trut...

:roll: You are familiar with Kant's idea of synthetic a priori, no? The notion like "every event has a cause", he believes is "a priori" (outside expe...

That there is a necessary background that underlies epistemic practices.

@"Banno" I think the "world in itself" didn't even concern Witt, nor did Kant really discuss much about it other than what it is not (the phenomenal)....

@"Banno" Why do we need to read Wittgenstein's "On Certainty" to get back to conclusions which Kant already implied with his ideas of "synthetic a pri...

If joint attention theory is correct, “hinge propositions” are simply those that must be formed when working with another in a common ground. The very...

Cognitive science and human language development are outside the scope of the propositions themselves, yet they explain a brain that can create propos...

As with everything 20th century tried to do away with by turning epistemology to language debates, it goes back to Kant :wink:

I base the deontology as rooted in the idea that people have inherent dignity and should not be used as a means to an ends. I agree, if you don't agre...

No, you are misconstruing my argument. The "no consent" and "inflicting suffering", if violated, WILL affect the person involved. "No humanity/civiliz...

I'm not sure how you get this. Placing ethics before humans would be the opposite. For example, some forms of utilitarianism would have it that you sh...

I realized I went from 3rd person to first person in that OP :lol:

Thank you much appreciated..oldie but goodie: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/10842/willy-wonkas-forced-game/p1 Here's a thought experiment....

Well, it seems to be that you believe that man is born for some reason (meaningful labor is a large part of that apparently homo economicus or whatnot...