Philosophy Now Forum

I don't see how is this related to "human nature". Cleaning is a learned human behavior and the standards of cleanliness vary in time, location and different strata of socialization or individual action. That's all that is needed to understand why some people think of cleanliness differen...

Perhaps one of you fine gentleman [and if there are any ladies in the gallery] can explain the following... One might assume that an adult should understand the plethora of benefits accruing to those who maintain a clean personal environment [and I am not talking about OCD-clean]. Just basic cleanl...

To say an object is independent of the mind is to in fact observe it as part of the mind given the negative limits which defined it (ie what the object is not) are in fact observed as part of the mind given they are observed through the mind. Strictly speaking, an object is not observed through the...

Your Bible Analogy is a bad one in this case. Rather here, the case is like I am very familiar with Quantum Mechanics [have done the necessary work, i.e. spent 3 years+ researching Kant full time and is refreshing it at present], while you have not read Kant thoroughly at all while only relying on ...

You are still imposing ‘your realism’ upon Kant which he categorically rejected. There you go again, reciting Kant's dogma without providing further counterarguments and analysis to my arguments. Your approach goes like that of the cult member that says: " the Bible is the truth and has all th...

You're still saying that I'm saying what I'm not saying. If there's someone imposing realism upon himself is Kant, when he forced upon himself the assertion that there are other things (selves) independent of his own mind (cognition, experience, etc.), which he merely inferred indirectly, not by dir...

Once again your resort to your usual (lazy) defense of: " it's a straw man" . You say this to everything, even if one is not describing the position that one wants to refute, but responding directly to a specific statement. And by means of this little trick, you avoid providing any counter...

As usual, you cannot provide arguments nor counterarguments to my points. Your modus operandi is to demand from others thorough explanations, while you lazily sit back and limit yourself to saying things like "you're blabbering" and "I believe what Kant says". However, Kant prese...

The fact is I don't condemn the use of the word "sense", I only condemn your misuse and abuse of that word to try to justify whatever absurd construction you want to pass as an argument. If you made a real effort to think, you would realize that if I said that the law of non-contradiction ...

jayjacobus wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 7:01 am To be insightful, a person must be able to separate the wheat from the chaff. I don't think you have done that.

It seems you're not even competent to make an argument, but I guess everyone is entitled to spit words into a forum.

As I had implied what I can agree with the term 'ontology' is in its widest sense as referring to "what-is" of reality... Whenever a wannabe philosopher is set to pick up all his spattered nonsense to attempt to recompose with it a decent, coherent argument, you will get him talking about...

Ontology deals with what exists and epistemology with whether it can be known, objectively, the answer to that question or not. Whatever realists or anti-realists do to deal with that, nevertheless implies an ontological stance, even if it's just a basic assumption in their framework. In other words...

Dismissing the ontological, because of whatever awkward justification, leaves the proponents of such doctrine lacking the grounds to make claims about any realm of being, which is exactly what they refuse to do. Such a stance would prove to be merely rhetorical and sophistic. Actually, anti-realist ...

I don't think there could be something wrong with me just because I don't fall for your fallacies and cheap attacks. Your supposed analogy, for example, does not refer to a logical mindset that could hinder progress in a rational debate. A good example of that would be your dogmatism and your approa...

Critical Race Theory? Are you so desperate to make a point that you bring completely irrelevant stuff? And now you come back to label me an "empirical idealist" after pages and pages of calling me a "critical realist". Consistency is surely not your best attribute. I have already...