You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Riley

['Member']Joined: August 11, 2019 at 05:26Last active: November 10, 2019 at 18:37None discussions29 comments

Bio

Philosopher and originator of Spiritual Idealism

Favourite Philosopher

Hegel, Aquinas, Schelling, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Augustine, Wittgenstein, Aristotle, Zeno of Citium, Seneca.

Comments

Clearly the ability to detect certain things in language isn't something you possess. I was quoting you. I simply did not add quotations. Quite faceti...
August 15, 2019 at 12:24
There is no primary thing which something does. One word... evidence. It is obvious that this Is the case: if something had two primary modes of teleo...
August 15, 2019 at 12:09
And where did I say I disagree. Why can thing which has an end include that which it can do. Including stopping beating? I just disagree that this is ...
August 15, 2019 at 11:36
I understand that. You just present zero evidence for the fact that you disagree. Do you understand that?
August 15, 2019 at 11:28
"You're seeing x being in state y due causal interaction with z as indicative of something not in x's nature." Perhaps. That isn't isolating it from t...
August 15, 2019 at 11:27
Secondly: you commit a fallacy in presuming that the state in which it can be in is teleological.. Or presumed to be intrinsic to it's nature on its o...
August 15, 2019 at 11:24
"No idea why I would think that." What kind of stupid answer is that? Where did I isolate the object from the rest of the world? And in any other sens...
August 15, 2019 at 11:15
Why are you certain that it is something that it can do, rather than it is lacking in what it can do.. being caused by some other alternative cause to...
August 15, 2019 at 11:01
It's either: 1. The nature of the heart is to beat until it no longer can. Or 2. The nature of the heart is to beat, and by some other cause it stops ...
August 15, 2019 at 10:55
You seem concerned with what everyone else believes. You aren't trying to make the silly argument from popularity are you?
August 15, 2019 at 10:32
I have read Camus, Sartre, Kierkegaard and many others. Some of what they say is good.. and others is absolute rubbish. Again: this is an argument bas...
August 15, 2019 at 10:32
I don't know. Typically, anti-natalism argues that it is intrinsically evil rather than relatively evil or subjectively evil.
August 15, 2019 at 04:38
Thats false in the way I used the word. And I specifically added 'telos' as well. We already discussed that the eyes are for seeing, the heart for pum...
August 15, 2019 at 04:36
Hard to quote Gnostics when they believe in many odd things.
August 15, 2019 at 02:40
By the shear manifestation of choice. We should not confuse the end of a thing with another. As I said before. Rather we should focus on the parts to ...
August 15, 2019 at 02:23
The problem with using the GTA is that anti-natalism bases itself in the objective idea that it is immoral to have children. The GTA is a goal-oriente...
August 15, 2019 at 02:11
I never said anything one can do is with the natural law- that is a strawman. And no, that is a false-comparison to say appealing to teleology is equa...
August 15, 2019 at 01:54
Oh my bad. I must not have caught that typo. Self-Consciousness possesses the ability to contradict the natural law because it manifests the will. But...
August 15, 2019 at 01:50
I already told you. You should give a look at Hegels idea of self-consciousness for these matters. Especially since this concept is that which manifes...
August 15, 2019 at 00:07
Cough cough... The natural law is an idea based in teleology and is a metaphysical argument. So saying I committed a naturalistic fallacy is baseless.
August 15, 2019 at 00:03
"There's nothing that the eyes can do that's not part of their nature." Hmmm.... you just accepted the idea of teleology. Teleology is that which is t...
August 14, 2019 at 21:06
And it should be made clear: that the natural law is in relation to teleology. Not the will and not to the individual in-and-of-itself. But rather the...
August 14, 2019 at 20:11
I'm assuming he's talking to me. Anti-natalism doesn't have to be forced for it to be evil. The same way murder is evil. Precisely why it is evil... y...
August 14, 2019 at 20:08
What argument do you have against teleology? And self-consciousness is not inherently contradictory to the natural law. So if teleology exists, it wou...
August 14, 2019 at 20:03
Oh Lord. Has the understanding of teleology in relation to ontology escaped you? It Was my point that self-consciousness, which manifests the will, is...
August 14, 2019 at 17:01
But as I said: Anti-natalism is the position that pregnancy, birth, etc- are all intrinsically evil because they induce suffering. However, there is o...
August 14, 2019 at 15:10
No it is unreasonable. Self-consciousnes brings are unnatural in-and-of-themselves because they can contradict the natural law. Which betrays a Darwin...
August 14, 2019 at 15:06
"If it is evil, why does it exist" was in reference to Gnosticism. Murder, rape and theft are not natural. They are not oriented in nature through som...
August 14, 2019 at 14:51
It is obvious that the position of antinatalism cannot be made to be one of an ethical position. The law, that is to say, the end of a thing by virtue...
August 13, 2019 at 19:21