Philosophy Now Forum

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 08, 2019 1:54 am

I Like Sushu wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 07, 2019 8:44 am

I think you overlooked the apostrophe?

Or I didn't care about spell check...

Check your reading not your spelling

Phenomena = appearances, and noumena = things-in-themselves, so far so good (if I understood correctly). But did he understand that technically and objectively, all phenomena are noumena (the noumena in the human head)? So some of the noumenon is directly 'knowable'. That is incorrect. Has anyone t...

The issue comes into play when people claim to talk about things ‘beyond human comprehension’. Citing the such a possibility is delusional. They is literally nothing we can say beyond human comprehension ... ironically even what I’m writing is merely ‘negative’ noumenon. Kant’s question in COPR was ...

If you could clarify the distinction between ‘negative’ and ‘positive’ noumenon’ it would probably have helped others understand a little better. The difficulty of Kant’s terminology is that we cannot even speak of ‘positive’ noumenon. This is because we cannot speak of what we can never speak of, b...

Noumenon is one of those terms so many people trip up on I’ve gotten used to seeing it misused. The distinction between ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ noumenon is what usually evades most - it is extremely hard to nail down.

Well, I hate to be the one to tell you but you’re misusing it. Sorry :( Whatever your feelings, the valid 'currency' in this forum is 'arguments'. So provide your justifications and arguments to support your point. Sorry, I misread your OP. My bad. I was just about to dish out quotes too! Haha! I w...

Well, I hate to be the one to tell you but you’re misusing it. Sorry

It was an analogy of your empty line of questioning. Go stare in the mirror or read a dictionary defining each word after the other in endless act of anus chasing ... or not?

If you have qualm with epistemic pursuits cut to it or be met with silence.

I think you overlooked the apostrophe?

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 07, 2019 8:34 am

I Like Sushu wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 07, 2019 6:52 am

Definitions are something to do with some project directed at ‘efficiency’. If not we would be here - SOME level efficiency is essential. Proof is my response to the OP here

Next question!

And what makes efficiency what it is?

Go and measure a ruler?

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 07, 2019 8:37 am

I Like Sushu wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 07, 2019 6:58 am

The delusion of people saying X, Y or Z is a delusion ... Oops!

X,Y,Z are fallacious in nature as subject to equivocation.

So are banana’s dreams.

The waffle about ‘noumenon’ is ill conceived then. If your aim was to find people who use the terms ‘exist’ and ‘real’ differently then that’s fine. In whatever way you’re attempting to use ‘noumenon’ it’s unconventional to me. Anyway, we agree on the main point ... boring. If anyone doesn’t they’re...

The delusion of people saying X, Y or Z is a delusion ... Oops!

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Benjamin Franklin As we have seen, free speech in the secular world is believed to inhibit the goal of a peaceful society. Society has evolved to create what are called “experts” ...

What is it? Discuss. Insane is a legal term, not a medical term. Mad is a medical term. So I'll give an example of what is not madness. What is not madness is going to a standard supermarket in the US and shopping for food, then taking it to the check-out and paying for it then going home. What is ...