Sam26

First, the ontological argument doesn't work for a variety of reasons. One is that you can't infer the existence of something based on a concept or co...

Wittgenstein's picture theory of meaning is not pictures of the objects. In fact, it's not even clear what an object is. It is though, a picture of a ...

One of the best things in life are friends, so I would put that top on your list of things to do, i.e., making friends. I've always had two or three r...

A picture describes how to make an object? What? Where did you get this from? What do you think objects are? You're chasing the boogie man.

His ontological views would take some explaining. I'm currently trying to write a book, but not on Wittgenstein's ideas.

There is a very definite undertone of metaphysics to what Wittgenstein is saying, and as such, it does have ontological implications. As far as him be...

Here's something I posted on Quora. This was written to answer the following question: What did Ludwig Wittgenstein mean by "the limits of my language...

Language ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- World | | Proposition -----------------...

Wittgenstein would tell you that you would be better off learning something like carpentry. I would say that most philosophers do not contribute much....

Damn, Fdrake you ended the thread in one post. :gasp:

Agreed.

Okay, I'll give another. Banno is as smart as me. :gasp:

Atomic facts are reflections of elementary propositions. Atomic facts can combine to form facts of any complexity, and as such, describe the world. So...

How about this one. You can't derive an ought from an is.

:razz:

I'm not sure I see the connection between what you're saying, and what I said. Are you talking about Wittgensteinian objects, i.e., the objects of the...

Pictures, in this model, are of facts, or the possibility of facts. It would seem that you have to have the facts, or the possibility of those facts i...

:wink:

I can't keep up with all your threads. lol

I'm not so sure this first principle is true. Being may be foundational, but not in terms of epistemology. One might say, it just IS. In a sense it de...

If you're referring to bipolarity, my inclination is to say that it's not persuasive.

/

Keep in mind that objects, for Wittgenstein, aren't the same as things. Objects are simple, they are the simplest constituent part of a fact that occu...

I think it's a bit more complicated. Are there issues of bipolarity in Wittgenstein? Yes. I would say that ascribing a particular view of philosophy t...

Wittgenstein was heavily influenced by Russell and Frege, especially in terms of the Tractatus. There is some influence of Schopenhauer and Kant, but,...

The world isn't made up of things. The world is made up of a particular arrangement of things. Things don't tell us anything. So facts are the arrange...

It doesn't' matter if the person is a scientist or a 6th grade dropout, what matters is how one justifies their belief. We want to hear the evidence o...

I think that any such being wouldn't want us to worship him/her/it. Nor would any such being want us to be obedient to their demands. That's seems to ...

I would hesitate to put Wittgenstein's philosophy into any category, but there are some facets of structuralism that fit. People always want to label ...

I'm baffled by this statement. Where did I say testimonial evidence is not testimonial evidence? Unless you think that all testimonial evidence is hea...

No, it's not an opinion, it's a well-formed inductive argument, so the conclusion follows from the strength of the premises. I'm telling you what I kn...

Don't give me your opinion, give me an argument. Address the argument specifically.

I don't think you've read my comments about testimonial evidence very closely. I've clearly distinguished between testimonial evidence that's hearsay,...

.

I agree. Most of these kinds of arguments are self-sealing, that is, they won't let anything count as counter-evidence, and this is true with most rel...

One of the most common criticisms aimed at near death experiences, is that they are hallucinations. Michael Shermer in a 2013 article in the Scientifi...

.

Simple: Logic = correct reasoning, that's what it's about, period.

Nothing could be further from the truth. First, that there is no secular basis for morality, is just not true, and it doesn't take much thought to rec...

For me, the mystical is not a need, but a fact of reality. It seems to be part of who we are as persons, not all people, but most people have an incli...

I recently was listening to Neil deGrasse Tyson’s answer to a question related to near death experiences, and while I respect his knowledge on the sub...

You've misunderstood my point.

Take care guys I'm going to bed.

You don't see the parallel?

Sorry, I don't understand your point.

Why do they have to have something in common? Do all games have something in common?

You're back at ground zero, what is difficult to understand here? It's pretty basic stuff.

Intuition isn't much to go on.

It's a negative fact, as opposed to a positive fact, or one that obtains.

Remember that just because something is possible that doesn't mean that it is so.