IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 29th November 2012, 02:39 PM   #321
joesixpack
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,531
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
Not useless, just irrelevant when it comes to solving the problems of mankind and making scientific progress. It's a nice hobby for some.
Watching ants in the garden seems like a nice hobby for some as well, but I see no benefit to it. Not surprisingly though, someone here could certainly tell me otherwise.

I imagine you think you don't bother with philosophy, but you do, every time you make a moral judgment every time you vote, every time you oppose a war, endorse a war, form an opinion on what has artistic merit, what has scientific merit, and every time you advocate a course of action for an individual, a group, or a government, or judge the actions of others.

You remind me of my niece at 11 years old, confidently informing me that she never reads. I pointed out that she reads every single day. She reads instructions on her frozen dinner, she reads the TV listings, she reads the menu at a restaurant, she reads her homework and notes from her friends, and she reads street signs and sinage on businesses all the damned time. Just because she never picks up a book for pleasure doesn't mean she doesn't read.

Likewise, just because you refuse to take any time to understand what a philosopher is trying to say doesn't mean that you don't "use" philosophy. I don't know what the hell they do at CERN all day, but I'm not arrogant enough to dismiss it as "worthless" because of that.
__________________
Generally sober 'til noon.
joesixpack is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 02:41 PM   #322
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by The Norseman View Post
What portion of reality is not amenable to experimentation?
Anything that is either non-repeatable or has dimensions beyond what can be captured in experiments. But this is a huge topic, one that philosophy deals with.

Here is a good critique, but the abstract has a good summary.
Quote:
http://inform.nu/Articles/Vol8/v8p189-210Mende.pdf
"The main reason is that a discipline only qualifies for the status of a science after it has progressed beyond empirical generalisations to explanatory theories; but although empirical methods are useful for discovering the former, they are inherently useless for creating the latter. So the empiricist doctrine retards scientific progress. Researchers should be aware of this danger, and research methodologists should attempt to counter it. "
Quote:
What answers has philosophy come up with so far that have a similar (not exact) metric of 'truth' as science does?
As I mentioned previously, academic philosophy and academic science have the same metric of 'truth' -- the peer review process.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 02:50 PM   #323
mijopaalmc
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,172
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
Originally Posted by Acleron View Post
Just what use is philosophy in science? That's the question to which nobody has answered with anything substantive.
^ This
Who says that philosophy has to be "of use" in science for philosophy to be a worthwhile pursuit?
mijopaalmc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 04:13 PM   #324
Walter Ego
Illuminator
 
Walter Ego's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dixie
Posts: 3,377
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
Not me mate, I'm just a Welsh thicko who doesn't understand the high falutin' world of philosophy.
You're hostile towards religion too. Is that because you don't understand it either?
Walter Ego is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 04:18 PM   #325
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Sigh.......how long is a short piece of string?

Last edited by dafydd; 29th November 2012 at 04:20 PM.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 05:37 PM   #326
Frank Newgent
Philosopher
 
Frank Newgent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,146
On a sub-atomic level the length of your string would be created by measuring for it.
__________________
Disturbances of the semantic reactions in connection with faulty education and ignorance must be considered as sub-microscopic colloidal lesions - Alfred O. Korzybski
Frank Newgent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 05:44 PM   #327
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by Frank Newgent View Post
On a sub-atomic level the length of your string would be created by measuring for it.
The string could be of any length until I put a tape measure to it?
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 05:49 PM   #328
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by Walter Ego View Post
You're hostile towards religion too. Is that because you don't understand it either?
So it's just a lack of understanding that prevents us from seeing the worth of philosophy?

If we just saw the Truth of Philosophy we'd understand?


That's incredibly condescending.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 05:56 PM   #329
Frank Newgent
Philosopher
 
Frank Newgent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,146
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
the string could would be of any length until i put a tape measure to it?

ftfy
__________________
Disturbances of the semantic reactions in connection with faulty education and ignorance must be considered as sub-microscopic colloidal lesions - Alfred O. Korzybski
Frank Newgent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 06:15 PM   #330
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
So it's just a lack of understanding that prevents us from seeing the worth of philosophy?

If we just saw the Truth of Philosophy we'd understand?


That's incredibly condescending.
I did ask earlier on which philosopher had hit the nail on the head, but no dice.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 06:17 PM   #331
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
I have a shelf full of philosophy books, I do not speak from ignorance, and to forestall the wits, yes, I have read them all.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 06:21 PM   #332
Kevin_Lowe
Guest
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,221
Originally Posted by The Norseman View Post
What answers has philosophy come up with so far that have a similar (not exact) metric of 'truth' as science does?
It turns out that questions like "what is moral behaviour" aren't the kind of questions that have answers that are true or false.

Moral claims can be consistent or inconsistent, useful or useless, intuitive or unintuitive, but not true or false.

If you think a moral claim is true or false then you're either confused, you're really talking about an empirical claim, or you've covertly smuggled in a moral claim as a "truth".

Beware, however! If you argue with me about this, you're doing philosophy. You'll be doing it badly, since the is/ought distinction is extremely difficult or impossible to argue against rationally, but you'll be doing it. So either way you're going to end up explicitly or implicitly endorsing philosophy as an important area of thought.
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 06:33 PM   #333
Kevin_Lowe
Guest
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,221
Originally Posted by PixyMisa View Post
Empiricism.
A better answer would be "structuralism", since that was the Continental philosophical movement predating post-structuralism/postmodernism.

It was equally annoying and stupid, but in a different way, since it tried (badly) to appropriate scientific ideas for Continental-philosophical discourse rather than handwaving away scientific ideas for the same purpose.

That is, of course, to the extent that you can talk intelligently about postmodernism at all. Since it's so vaguely defined, poorly explained and spread about between different texts I've found that that pinning postmodernism down so you can kill it is like stapling custard.

Plus acolytes of postmodernism have a mysticist's conviction that if you read postmodernism you will become convinced of its profundity, and that if you are not convinced of its profundity it just proves you haven't read enough of it. Part of pomo doctrine is that you don't have to be able to explain it with clarity, which of course makes it impossible to ever win an argument with pomos on their own terms.
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 06:34 PM   #334
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
In other words, Norseman, you can't win. Every time you open your mouth you are philosophizing.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 06:46 PM   #335
Kevin_Lowe
Guest
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,221
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
In other words, Norseman, you can't win. Every time you open your mouth you are philosophizing.
Bingo! You finally get it. Every time you open your mouth (to discuss matters of ethics, value, how we should live our lives and so on) you are doing philosophy.

This is exactly why your rant against philosophy was dumb from the outset, as we've been telling you from the outset. I'm glad it's finally sunk in.
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 06:48 PM   #336
Walter Ego
Illuminator
 
Walter Ego's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dixie
Posts: 3,377
Aside from the general anti-intellectualism of the philosophy bashers I noted earlier, I'm wondering if some aspects of what has been called the Village Atheist Syndrome might apply here.

Quote:
Apparently when the individuals with a proclivity for the syndrome find themselves among what they had believed to be like-minded free thinkers, they are both shocked and appalled to find that others disagree with them, often on major issues. This disagreement is marked by what can be only called anti-social behavior, a clear mark of the village atheist syndrome. In order to get their way they nit-pick everything to death...
Forum rules prevent me from getting more specific or naming names but as someone (Schopenhauer?) said, if the shoe fits...
Walter Ego is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 09:35 PM   #337
PixyMisa
Persnickety Insect
 
PixyMisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sunny Munuvia
Posts: 16,343
Originally Posted by Walter Ego View Post
Aside from the general anti-intellectualism of the philosophy bashers I noted earlier
No.
__________________
Free blogs for skeptics... And everyone else. mee.nu
What, in the Holy Name of Gzortch, are you people doing?!?!!? - TGHO
PixyMisa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 09:38 PM   #338
Frank Newgent
Philosopher
 
Frank Newgent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,146
Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe
Originally Posted by PixyMisa View Post
Empiricism.
A better answer would be "structuralism", since that was the Continental philosophical movement predating post-structuralism/postmodernism.

It was equally annoying and stupid, but in a different way, since it tried (badly) to appropriate scientific ideas for Continental-philosophical discourse rather than handwaving away scientific ideas for the same purpose.

That is, of course, to the extent that you can talk intelligently about postmodernism at all. Since it's so vaguely defined, poorly explained and spread about between different texts I've found that that pinning postmodernism down so you can kill it is like stapling custard.

Plus acolytes of postmodernism have a mysticist's conviction that if you read postmodernism you will become convinced of its profundity, and that if you are not convinced of its profundity it just proves you haven't read enough of it. Part of pomo doctrine is that you don't have to be able to explain it with clarity, which of course makes it impossible to ever win an argument with pomos on their own terms.

Apt to call structuralism the opposite of empiricism though i don't get the hatred for structuralism.

Autopoiesis plus history being empiricism (along the same lines maybe behaviorism or positivism ie the objective world)... phenomenology plus history being structuralism (subjective world) very generally speaking.
__________________
Disturbances of the semantic reactions in connection with faulty education and ignorance must be considered as sub-microscopic colloidal lesions - Alfred O. Korzybski
Frank Newgent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 10:13 PM   #339
Kevin_Lowe
Guest
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,221
Originally Posted by Frank Newgent View Post
Apt to call structuralism the opposite of empiricism though i don't get the hatred for structuralism.
Intellectual Impostures by Sokal and Bricmont amply demonstrates the bankruptcy of that movement.

Quote:
. phenomenology plus history being structuralism (subjective world) very generally speaking.
Phenomenology is in my view another intellectual imposture. You write a first person descriptive essay, jam in a couple of footnotes to Merleau-Ponty or someone, call it "research" and publish it in an "academic journal". Nothing of any intellectual value or interest is accomplished.
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2012, 10:51 PM   #340
PixyMisa
Persnickety Insect
 
PixyMisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sunny Munuvia
Posts: 16,343
Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe View Post
A better answer would be "structuralism", since that was the Continental philosophical movement predating post-structuralism/postmodernism.

It was equally annoying and stupid, but in a different way, since it tried (badly) to appropriate scientific ideas for Continental-philosophical discourse rather than handwaving away scientific ideas for the same purpose.
Sounds like structuralism is the mirror opposite of post-modernism, where empiricism might be viewed as its diametric opposite (across several dimenstions).

Quote:
That is, of course, to the extent that you can talk intelligently about postmodernism at all. Since it's so vaguely defined, poorly explained and spread about between different texts I've found that that pinning postmodernism down so you can kill it is like stapling custard.
An underappreciated pastime, I always thought.

Stapling custard, that is.

Quote:
Plus acolytes of postmodernism have a mysticist's conviction that if you read postmodernism you will become convinced of its profundity, and that if you are not convinced of its profundity it just proves you haven't read enough of it. Part of pomo doctrine is that you don't have to be able to explain it with clarity, which of course makes it impossible to ever win an argument with pomos on their own terms.
Yes, it's a nasty invasive meme that way.
__________________
Free blogs for skeptics... And everyone else. mee.nu
What, in the Holy Name of Gzortch, are you people doing?!?!!? - TGHO
PixyMisa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 12:57 AM   #341
BNRT
Muse
 
BNRT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 713
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
I have a shelf full of philosophy books, I do not speak from ignorance, and to forestall the wits, yes, I have read them all.
And there was nothing that made you think? Nothing that changed your ideas of the world? Nothing that made you question your own beliefs? Nothing that made you wonder whether your moral beliefs were all compatible with each other?
BNRT is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 03:08 AM   #342
Kevin_Lowe
Guest
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,221
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
I have a shelf full of philosophy books, I do not speak from ignorance, and to forestall the wits, yes, I have read them all.
From A Fish Called Wanda:

Wanda: Oh, right! To call you stupid would be an insult to stupid people! I've known sheep that could outwit you. I've worn dresses with higher IQs. But you think you're an intellectual, don't you, ape?

Otto West: Apes don't read philosophy.

Wanda: Yes they do, Otto. They just don't understand it. Now let me correct you on a couple of things, OK? Aristotle was not Belgian. The central message of Buddhism is not "Every man for himself." And the London Underground is not a political movement. Those are all mistakes, Otto. I looked them up.
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 03:40 AM   #343
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe View Post
From A Fish Called Wanda:

Wanda: Oh, right! To call you stupid would be an insult to stupid people! I've known sheep that could outwit you. I've worn dresses with higher IQs. But you think you're an intellectual, don't you, ape?

Otto West: Apes don't read philosophy.

Wanda: Yes they do, Otto. They just don't understand it. Now let me correct you on a couple of things, OK? Aristotle was not Belgian. The central message of Buddhism is not "Every man for himself." And the London Underground is not a political movement. Those are all mistakes, Otto. I looked them up.
Oooh,catty. I am cut to the quick. I cite the story Of The Emperor's New Clothes

Last edited by dafydd; 30th November 2012 at 03:43 AM.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 06:10 AM   #344
Acleron
Master Poster
 
Acleron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,290
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Here's why that's wrong:

The real point is that you have to be neither a scientist or trained in science to think logically, derive ideas and concepts or do anything else in psychic research.

If scientists want to comment on the process they are quite entitled, but, from experience, they won't be contributing anything.

Some of the best criticisms come from outside perspectives using different tools.
But to do real science, not only do you need to be thoughtful and logical, you have to do an great deal of work to learn your subject before contributing.
Acleron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 06:24 AM   #345
mijopaalmc
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,172
Originally Posted by Frank Newgent View Post
Apt to call structuralism the opposite of empiricism though i don't get the hatred for structuralism.

Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe View Post
Intellectual Impostures by Sokal and Bricmont amply demonstrates the bankruptcy of that movement.
Actually, Gabriel Stolzenberg has done a fairly thorough job of demonstrating that, like the anti-philosophy posters in this thread, Sokal and Birchmont and the various other scientists who advocated their position on the vapidity of post-modernism were responding to straw men. He is quite clear that Sokal, Birchmont, and their supporter do not have to agree with the post-modernists; however, he insists that such disagreement should not arise from facile (mis)readings.
mijopaalmc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 07:16 AM   #346
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by Acleron View Post
But to do real science, not only do you need to be thoughtful and logical, you have to do an great deal of work to learn your subject before contributing.
I think we've reached a point of strong agreement.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 07:17 AM   #347
joesixpack
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,531
Originally Posted by Acleron View Post
But to do real science, not only do you need to be thoughtful and logical, you have to do an great deal of work to learn your subject before contributing.
In contrast, the philosophical world is awash with examples of people (who've never studied philosophy) stepping in off the street, trying their hand at it and turning the entire field on its head?
__________________
Generally sober 'til noon.

Last edited by joesixpack; 30th November 2012 at 07:21 AM.
joesixpack is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 08:24 AM   #348
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by BNRT View Post
And there was nothing that made you think? Nothing that changed your ideas of the world? Nothing that made you question your own beliefs? Nothing that made you wonder whether your moral beliefs were all compatible with each other?

Sounds like you're talking religion not philosophy.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 08:27 AM   #349
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by Walter Ego View Post
Aside from the general anti-intellectualism of the philosophy bashers I noted earlier, I'm wondering if some aspects of what has been called the Village Atheist Syndrome might apply here.



Forum rules prevent me from getting more specific or naming names but as someone (Schopenhauer?) said, if the shoe fits...
From the insults thrown around by the philosophers in this thread there seems to be a severe case of Nose In the Air Syndrome here.


Forum rules prevent me from getting more specific or naming names but as someone (Schopenhauer?) said, if the shoe fits...
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 08:33 AM   #350
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe View Post
Intellectual Impostures by Sokal and Bricmont amply demonstrates the bankruptcy of that movement.



Phenomenology Philosophy is in my view another intellectual imposture. You write a first person descriptive essay, jam in a couple of footnotes to Merleau-Ponty or someone, call it "research" and publish it in an "academic journal". Nothing of any intellectual value or interest is accomplished.
ftfy
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 08:40 AM   #351
mijopaalmc
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,172
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
From the insults thrown around by the philosophers in this thread there seems to be a severe case of Nose In the Air Syndrome here.


Forum rules prevent me from getting more specific or naming names but as someone (Schopenhauer?) said, if the shoe fits...
Translation: "I know you are, but what I am?"
mijopaalmc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 09:19 AM   #352
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by mijopaalmc View Post
Translation: "I know you are, but what I am?"
Taunting and insults, is that all you got?

I've exchanged posts with a lot of philosophers on the web and they all eventually told me that if I'd just study weaving and understood the finer aspects of the warp and woof of the cloth I too would see the Emperors' new clothes.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 10:02 AM   #353
joesixpack
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,531
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
Taunting and insults, is that all you got?
Oh my frikking gourd, the irony contained in this one sentence would defy exaggeration.
__________________
Generally sober 'til noon.
joesixpack is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 11:15 AM   #354
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by joesixpack View Post
Oh my frikking gourd, the irony contained in this one sentence would defy exaggeration.






tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 11:25 AM   #355
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by tsig View Post






It's as if you and I had been caught drawing rude graffiti on the walls of Plato's cave. Yes, philosophy fans, I have heard of Plato. He invented the plate.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 11:29 AM   #356
mijopaalmc
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,172
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
Taunting and insults, is that all you got?

I've exchanged posts with a lot of philosophers on the web and they all eventually told me that if I'd just study weaving and understood the finer aspects of the warp and woof of the cloth I too would see the Emperors' new clothes.
It's neither a taunt nor an insult to point out that your post merely reversed the point being made in the post to which you responded. I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I can be latinized to tu quoque. Is that considered less of a taunt or insult?

It is also worth noting that you apparently reject the possibility that Emperor is actually wearing clothes because you don't like his fashion sense.

Last edited by mijopaalmc; 30th November 2012 at 11:32 AM.
mijopaalmc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 11:36 AM   #357
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
And you reject the possibility that the Emperor is naked.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 11:48 AM   #358
mijopaalmc
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,172
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
And you reject the possibility that the Emperor is naked.
No, I don't, but I think that we would need to have a common definition of "naked" before we established that fact.

I understand that some of the anti-philosophy posters in this thread dislike philosophy because they find what they think is the dominant school of thought within philosophy, most often post-modernism to be "intellectually bankrupt". However, they then continue on to reject most, if not all, of philosophy because of that, which is again like denying that the Emperor is wearing clothes because you don't like the cut and color of his waistcoat.
mijopaalmc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 12:35 PM   #359
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by mijopaalmc View Post
No, I don't, but I think that we would need to have a common definition of "naked" before we established that fact.
Spoken in the true spirit of philosophy. But first we need to agree on the definitions of the words ''definition'', ''agree'' and ''fact''.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2012, 12:52 PM   #360
mijopaalmc
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,172
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
And you reject the possibility that the Emperor is naked.
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
Spoken in the true spirit of philosophy. But first we need to agree on the definitions of the words ''definition'', ''agree'' and ''fact''.
Spoken like someone whp truly doesn't understand how philosophy works. All I have seen you do is assert that the Emperor is naked without trying to establish why you think he is naked.

If we are going to have productive discussion about the nakedness of the Emperor, we have to make sure that we are both using "naked" in a mutually intelligible way. Without some provisional agreement on how to use the terms under discussion, the discussion itself become utterly meaningless.
mijopaalmc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:41 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.