180 Proof

:eyes: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qQzdAsjWGPg

:zip:

The same reason we need art – "in order not to die of the truth." ~F.N.

I've not said or implied anything about "meaning" so referring to "verificationism" is a non sequitur. Also, if you think "idealism" (e.g. reality is ...

Pyrrhonianism, fallibilism and actualism, respectively.

And yet you confuse Ebonics with slang and essentialize "racial memories". :brow: If that's not a coincidence, I guess it's quite the tell. Anyway, ha...

Okay. If you say so.

I think it was fairly pervasive here in the states in the 90s & 00s in the emo / grunge scenes. Outside of those "teen-angsty" scenes though I'd lost ...

:cool: But that "demonstration" didn't happen on a street corner in Harlem, the South Bronx, Brownsville/East NY Brooklyn, South-side Chicago ... Comp...

My "proof" is that there is no truth-maker for "idealism" (e.g. reality is mind-dependent).

No. It's a speculative supposition (or avowal), not propositional statement / thesis.

How does one know that, certainly causing so much "pain" to family and friends, one's own "pain" will end with deliberately killing oneself?

"Idealism" (like materialism, etc) is neither a formal theorem nor a factual truth-claim so the question is incoherent.

In other words, (Western?) philosophy progressively eliminates conceptual confusions, discursive nonsense and logical fallacies – sophistry – from for...

My my ... "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." :ok: :smirk:

And you clearly do not understand him.

What? :confused:

Maybe as a class but not, by definition, as individual members of the elite. Bezos et al are "business elites" with corrupting influences on matters o...

That's a profoundly ignorant statement. :brow: Are you a Black American, ucarr, raised in the 'hood? Maybe I'm mistaken but I get a very distinct impr...

Non sequitur. After all, drunks are "happy" while they are drunk. That's not a "good life". Bezos is not a Peripatetic paragon if only because he is n...

Pathetic dodge, Batshitz. :razz:

I don't follow you.

After agreeing with my – conceding my point about – ethical naturalism, why do you still think so?

So the "distinction" is merely abstract and not existential or practiced, thus irrelevant to ethics (e.g. ethical naturalism).

We're talking past each other. I don't understand your replies to what I've written.

Then you dispute or the finding that many suicide-attempt survivors realize they did not really want to die?

:up: Here you go – from old thread:

:rofl:

:fire:

Progress in philosophy? An excerpt from an old post: And furthermore ... https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/532685

Nothing in this story says "black-on-black crime" to me. Or "Ebonics" – you've no idea how to tell the difference between that idiolect and common sla...

I don't know what you mean. What "fact/value distinction"? There aren't any value-free facts for a naturalist (of my persuasion). For instance, suffer...

In the wake of SCOTUS – for the first time in American history – taking away the fundamental right of reproductive freedom (re: forced pregnancy = for...

:up:

In QG, the planck era ("BB") occurred at the planck scale for which classical metrics (e.g. distance, interval, causality) do not apply. This is why t...

:up:

Conservation laws, like spacetime, apply within – immanent to – the (this) universe. Mass-energy belongs to the (this) universe which is not "eternal"...

1. An idealist might say 'entities are finite monads within / constituting The Infinite Monad and only from the perspective of finite monads do finite...

:yikes: :rofl:

:100: :100: :100:

For a physicalist, (Kastrup's) idealism confuses the map with the territory – that it is (we are) maps "all the way down".

No, sir, I don't think so. QM is science. "Interpretations of QM" are philosophy (of science). The latter only describes the presuppositions and impli...

A fun pastiche of Ahnuld the Barbarian (& Conquorer) in The Matrix. :strong: :smirk:

A well-written telling rather than showing.

You really had me ... then "I called in sick". :confused:

It reads like a long diary entry written days later. Who's diary? I'm not going to say yet. :wink:

Written by someone who's been no closer to the 'hood than an old hiphop video.

Not fair, I can't ban you! :smirk:

:cool: I'm sure it sucks but you won't hear that from me. :snicker:

I don't think so. Hegel completely rejects Kant's noumenon / thing-in-itself – he doesn't "have to assume" it and neither do we (pace Schopenhauer).