hello Ethan and welcome to the forum
hope to have great discussions
nice news also for philosophy's antichrist: an engineer who is interested in philosophy
Search found 15 matches
- Sun Aug 26, 2012 4:14 pm
- Forum: Introduce Yourself
- Topic: Hello!!! Everyone!!!
- Replies: 5
- Views: 1884
- Mon Aug 06, 2012 6:30 pm
- Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
- Topic: Philosophy is useless
- Replies: 208
- Views: 52332
Re: Philosophy is useless
<<Everybody is certain of her ideas and argumentations, everybody defends them as though they are the most evident and clear “ fact ” in the world, nevertheless, there’s little agreement in any single point and it doesn’t seem a prospect of a general universal determining solution. Not only that but...
- Wed Aug 01, 2012 7:36 pm
- Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
- Topic: Philosophy is useless
- Replies: 208
- Views: 52332
Re: Philosophy is useless
So? Philosophy is still worthless. I'm writing on a computer that exists due to science and engineering, not philosophy. What if you’ve defined philosophy in such a way that nothing can change the situation for you? Then you’ve made “use” and “usefulness” meaningless. And as a matter of fact its be...
- Mon Jul 30, 2012 11:20 am
- Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
- Topic: Philosophy is useless
- Replies: 208
- Views: 52332
Re: Philosophy is useless
philosophy in a broad sense is equivalent to what we call "belief", "view"or "conviction". in other words the use of the term philosophy is in a broad sense similar to that of those concepts. so philosophy per se neither has a negative nor a positive sense. hence it is as nonsense to say that philo...
- Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:43 pm
- Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
- Topic: Philosophy is useless
- Replies: 208
- Views: 52332
Re: Philosophy is useless
philosophy in a broad sense is equivalent to what we call "belief", "view"or "conviction". in other words the use of the term philosophy is in a broad sense similar to that of those concepts. so philosophy per se neither has a negative nor a positive sense. hence it is as nonsense to say that philos...
- Sun Jul 29, 2012 1:08 pm
- Forum: Epistemology - Theory of Knowledge
- Topic: what is epistemic closure principle
- Replies: 4
- Views: 5602
Re: what is epistemic closure principle
Thanks so much for the explanation Aequitas
- Sat Jul 28, 2012 10:54 am
- Forum: Epistemology - Theory of Knowledge
- Topic: what is epistemic closure principle
- Replies: 4
- Views: 5602
Re: what is epistemic closure principle
thank u very much Aequitas; I think the fact that i don't know whether the consequent of a conditional is the case should not necessarily count as the negation of that conditional's antecedent and hence construct a modus tollens. i.e. if we have "if p then q" and also have "~Kq", this cannot give us...
- Fri Jul 27, 2012 10:20 am
- Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
- Topic: Philosophy is useless
- Replies: 208
- Views: 52332
Re: Philosophy is useless
In science and mathematics, one may discover truths, and answers, but in philosophy, all one encounters are arguments. In more than 3,000 years of argument, no philosopher has ever explained what is moral, what is immoral, or even if morality exists. If there is a problem that cannot be answered by...
- Thu Jul 26, 2012 9:15 pm
- Forum: Epistemology - Theory of Knowledge
- Topic: what is epistemic closure principle
- Replies: 4
- Views: 5602
what is epistemic closure principle
what is this thing "epistemic closure principle" exactly (which is sometimes mentioned as the rule of transmission) and why has it become so important in contemporary epistemology? what is its implications in basic topics of epistemology?
thank u so much for your attention every body!
thank u so much for your attention every body!
- Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:51 pm
- Forum: Introduce Yourself
- Topic: An introduction
- Replies: 2
- Views: 1454
Re: An introduction
Hi Marty and welcome to the philosophy forum
hope to have great discussions!
hope to have great discussions!
- Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:37 am
- Forum: Epistemology - Theory of Knowledge
- Topic: What is this thing called Mckinsey Paradox?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 3882
Re: What is this thing called Mckinsey Paradox?
Thank you so much for your comprehensive response Veritas! I saw that article, but you know, at the first sight its very hard for me to see why this argument should be classified as a paradox, since none of its constituents are something commonsense would necessarily disagree; too soft to be called ...
- Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:41 pm
- Forum: Epistemology - Theory of Knowledge
- Topic: What is this thing called Mckinsey Paradox?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 3882
Re: What is this thing called Mckinsey Paradox?
Hi Thundril and thank you for your rersponse I think there's something about that paradox in Stanford encyclopedia under the entry of externalism-inrenalism debate which I've read it Thundril, but the explanation I found at stanford was too short too general and too vague. I mean, when I hear the na...
- Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:26 am
- Forum: Epistemology - Theory of Knowledge
- Topic: What is this thing called Mckinsey Paradox?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 3882
What is this thing called Mckinsey Paradox?
In Epistemology and specifically in internalism-externalism debate, there's a paradox called "McKinsey paradox". is there anyone who has heard anything about this paradox? what are the premises of it, what is the importance of this paradox and which theory does it specifically threaten? thank you ve...
- Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:42 pm
- Forum: Introduce Yourself
- Topic: Hello everyone!
- Replies: 3
- Views: 1538
Re: Hello everyone!
Hello WHYMASTER47 and thank you very much for your nice welcome! "proofs are empty vessels of thought". this is what schopenhauer says and H completely agree with it. without intuition and content, logic is nothing but mere playing with empty symbols; a game, at the best. sometimes I think logic ser...
- Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:59 pm
- Forum: Introduce Yourself
- Topic: Hello everyone!
- Replies: 3
- Views: 1538
Hello everyone!
Hi there! I'm Hossein from Iran and I'm very glad to have entered in this philosophical forum, I'm interested in philosophy, I've got M.A. degree in logic. my main interests are analytic Philosophy, Philosophy of Language, Epistemology (specifically: Scepticism) and ... you name it! between great ph...