I fail to see the point of your reply in light of me not saying anything in particular about Husserl (who is neither the alpha nor omega of phenomenol...
I'm not aware of any compelling evidence of a "conspiracy by the US government" to cover-up what actually happened on "9-11". Snowden? Assange? Wikile...
The premise has been twice refuted by logic and physics, therefore your argument fails. Period. Stop kidding yourself – the OP is that weak. There's n...
Stop embarrassing yourself, Fool. Until you actually read at least the first two works on the list I've given you, it's a waste of time for anyone to ...
Gibberish. Sorry, man. You've no evidence. I didn't read your argument but you give plently that you haven't read my 2 logical and physical counter-ar...
:rofl: There was a plot to knock down the WTC and it succeeded. "The conspiracy" that those building were brought down by US government actors is simp...
What "strawmen"? Stop special pleading ... Your premise is incoherent, therefore the argument fails. QED. :smirk: I put more cogent, apt, counters on ...
"Conspiracy theories", in fact, distract an impotent, frustrated, public's ADHD from the circus of unjust (or nefarious) systems, policies & practices...
No, sir, I also read your opening sentence: Clearly it does not. This "concluded ... necessity" has long been refuted in both philosophy (logic) and p...
As far as I can tell, Gnosticism is the template, or Ur-conspiracy theory, in "the West" (vide H. Bloom) – a witches' brew of Platonic two-worldism an...
My post simply shows that "first ... logically necessary" is incoherent. Based on that faulty premise, for me your argument is DOA. No diss meant, jus...
... therefore, the argument in OP is unsound at minimum. The "default", btw, is undecided, not "justified" (re: 3-value logic). :yawn: "Evidence"? – f...
... therefore a corollary of my argument: only an "omnibenevolent" deity is worthy of worship (any other kind is indistinguishable from a capricious /...
I refer you to my reply to the OP which is further elaborated on in the argument to which the quotation is linked. Do take the trouble to click on my ...
P & S both concern 'intentionality'. P differs from S by excluding ontic commitments from its examination of intentionality (i.e. whether or not e.g. ...
Philosophy makes explicit, or describes, the assumptions (confusions) of conceptual questions and/or hypothetical problems. Philosophy of science also...
November readings: • In the Presence of Absence, Mahmoud Darwish • The Dawn of Everything, David Graeber & David Wengrow • The Good Old Days, eds. E. ...
You said the status of truth-claims do not change and I say they do. Not the same page or even the same book. And "science and philosophy both make me...
Yeah, but I didn't confuse them, I just pointed out that "the status of truth claims" do, in fact, change: undecided, demonstated or refuted. For inst...
A truth-claims' "status" changes from undecided to positive truth-value when demonstrated and then to negative truth-value when refuted. "Earth is fla...
More "indisputable" than A=A? I doubt it. Anyway, tell me what Descartes actually proves with his "Cogito". No. I think of interpretations of "QT" & "...
As far as I can discern them, the basic difference between philosophy and science is the latter concerns defeasible reasoning towards the best explana...
Historical considerations aside, in so far as epistemology concerns interpreting (our world) by how (we) 'connect-its-dots' & 'fill-in-our-blanks', me...
Imperialist? :roll: How could the US not be an imperialist hegemon given its own colonial pedigree and foundational color caste-class hierarchy? If th...
I appreciate the clarification. "The unseen" (occulted) isn't very parsimonious though. In the main, too many folks believe in a great many things whi...
Comments