Philosophy Now Forum

Why both of you are absent of proof is due to an absence of definition as to how and why you intuit your stance. Intuition alone can be faulty when not merged with reason. If what I say is nothing, fine, but given your position you must define as to why and how due to this being a philosophy forum....

commonsense wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 13, 2020 1:51 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:06 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 12, 2020 10:44 pm

How do you know that you know for sure?

I don't know for sure. It's just a suspicion, really.

If multiple people suspect the same thing, doesn’t that make it a fact?

Do you suspect the same thing?

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 12, 2020 10:44 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 12, 2020 10:40 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 12, 2020 10:32 pm

Explain how it means nothing.

I can't explain it, I just intuitively know.

How do you know that you know for sure?

I don't know for sure. It's just a suspicion, really.

This form, as existing through a looping imprints itself on the pscyhe, but as a loop is intrinsically empty thus acting as a filter for how we percieve further phenomena. The emptiness of the phenomena allows for the pattern to assume further patterns. The traceable form acts as the barrier which ...

This form, as existing through a looping imprints itself on the pscyhe, but as a loop is intrinsically empty thus acting as a filter for how we percieve further phenomena. The emptiness of the phenomena allows for the pattern to assume further patterns. The traceable form acts as the barrier which ...

You've done far too much writing, Luxin. You will have to condense it down into a couple of short paragraphs if you want me to read it, and tell you why it's a load of rubbish.

commonsense wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 02, 2020 7:44 pm

Both have both benefits and disadvantages in particular situations, but on the whole does one system offer more than the other?

Either one is just a preference. Which one is better depends entirely on which one you prefer.

Who is doing the paying back? I couldn't be bothered to read the OP, sorry.

It is a circular idea - since the "fittest" is defined as "those who survive". "Survival of those who survive" is not a useful concept. By "fittest" I think Darwin meant best fitted to their environment. So the concept would be, survival of those who are best fitted to their environment. The truth ...

bahman wrote: ↑

Sat May 16, 2020 9:50 pm

In here we discuss that the reality is made of two things, minds and ideas. Minds are not due to/subjected to ideas. Therefore, they have no location.

I don't know if minds have no location. All I can say is that my mind never seems to be very far away from the rest of me.

I suggest that human beings are born with a sense of what we term as ethics and morality. No they are not born with either sense. A moral sense is learnt behavior, the sense is an artificially contructed imposed progamme imputed into the brain of the new life from another source other than their ow...

Dontaskme wrote: ↑

Sun May 24, 2020 3:12 pm

It's our moral duty to put on a happy face

Never let it be said that I neglected my duty.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑

Sun May 24, 2020 3:01 pm

Don't worry

Okay, I'll try not to.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑

Sun May 24, 2020 2:53 pm

But that would require an inquirer, and you have already admitted you have no concern over where such an inquirer would come from, so you'd be wasting your time on inquiring into something that is not actually there to even bother about.

Yes, I would be wasting my time, wouldn't I?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑

Sun May 24, 2020 2:29 pm

I join this group of senseless sense makers because it's all there is to do on a philosophy forum.

Okay, you do what you gotta do, but it also means having your own "sense" held up to scrutiny.