Philosophy Now Forum

What's the easiest way to discredit something? Call it an "antisemitic conspiracy theory". And add "alt-right" just to make sure. Or the easiest way to be discredited is to be an alt-right, antisemitic conspiracy theory. If you hear a whooshing sound, that'll be my point going o...

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Thu Jun 06, 2024 2:15 pmThis demonstrates, to me, that you cannot even see our present.

I just don't see it through your turd tinted glasses, Gus.

How many of those references provide substantiation that Cultural Marxism is a "conspiracy theory"? I'll warrant you it's probably not even one. It really depends on what you accept as substantiation. Yes, I thought so. Not a one. Which goes to show how you interpret things in ways that s...

Well, sorry to say, but that's what you get for trusting Wikipedia -- a half truth, combined with a misleading claim. You're quite right of course; sometimes Wikipedia can be unreliable, and not only when you happen to disagree with it...I must say though, the author seems like a diligent fellow; t...

."Cultural" Marxism is a variation of Marxism. You're now speaking of "Classical" or "Economic" Marxism. Not according to the ever reliable Wikipedia: "Cultural Marxism" refers to a far-right antisemitic conspiracy theory that misrepresents the Frankfurt Scho...

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 12:03 pmDid you break IC?

Wasn't me, guv.

."Cultural" Marxism is a variation of Marxism. You're now speaking of "Classical" or "Economic" Marxism. Not according to the ever reliable Wikipedia: "Cultural Marxism" refers to a far-right antisemitic conspiracy theory that misrepresents the Frankfurt Scho...

... no other theory has anything close to the empirical data to make it reasonable to suppose at all. What empirical data do you have that makes your view more plausible than George Berkeley's idealism, for example? Correct! There is no empirical data that makes your theory more plausible than many...

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2024 8:41 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:53 pm... no other theory has anything close to the empirical data to make it reasonable to suppose at all.

What empirical data do you have that makes your view more plausible than George Berkeley's idealism, for example?

Perhaps it's sinking in.

Why has she got a birthday cake on her head?

Well look, the fact that I happen to think the most likely explanation of the sequential phenomena that give the appearance of causality is some sequence of causally related, broadly speaking mechanical events, doesn't mean that it is. No, nothing is absolute, of course. We're talking about human k...

Precisely.

Well, I happen to think the most likely explanation of the sequential phenomena that give the appearance of causality is some sequence of causally related, broadly speaking mechanical events. Right. And that sequence has to have had a starting point, because an infinite regress is mathematically an...

I don't happen to believe in a block universe; like you, I think causality is a thing. The point is that science would not look any different in a block universe, nor an idealist universe, nor a simulation, nor if we were Boltzmann brains, nor any other underdetermined hypothesis you fancy. I don't...

Polanyi was influenced by Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Knowledge which came out four years after Personal Knowledge. That's very funny. I don't know how many people there ever were who were writing BEFORE the person who allegedly influenced them. Well, perhaps you are unaware of Polanyi's post St...