Philosophy Now Forum

The symbols of mathematics are not material As they have no property or dimension but are purely conceptual This is not only true for mathematics but for every language as well I + I = I0 is not true in base I0 which is the standard base human beings use And is why the standard number line only has ...

Understanding does not necessarily involve transforming the abstract into the concrete Something can be understood at the conceptual level with no creation involved at all Also some things that can be understood cannot be made concrete anyway For example I + I = 2 is a statement that cannot be trans...

In any language but kenglish ( thanks to FlashDangerpants for that one ) what you are saying is that you believe the universe is static and eternal I think when Ken talks about the Universe he means absolutely everything that exists at this point in time And when you talk about the Universe you mea...

Moral subjectivism is just the rejection of the claim that morality is objective - that there are moral facts So moral subjectivism is not moral skepticism and it does not entail moral relativism . If there is nothing to be known there is nothing about knowledge of which we should be skeptical or r...

Happiness and contentment are quite not the same
The former is more idealistic / the latter is more practical
One can be happy some of the time but content most of the time
And therefore contentment is far more attainable than happiness

If you see no difference between psychological flaws and limitations there is nothing to discuss To describe anything as a flaw requires an assumption of what something is supposed to be What is it you think all human beings are supposed to be Just because you do not like something does not make it...

The point is if one accuses all human beings of a characteristic unless they are not a human being it must include themselves It was directed at the statement : We all have psychological flaws - every single one of us Whether such a statement is true or not the one who makes the statement is claimi...

If you see no difference between psychological flaws and limitations there is nothing to discuss To describe anything as a flaw requires an assumption of what something is supposed to be What is it you think all human beings are supposed to be Just because you do not like something does not make it...

The intellectual world and the real world are not mutually independent of each other because one is the map and the other is the terrain Sometimes it is too complex to understand and sometimes it is too much information and sometimes both and sometimes neither of these And while it can be experienc...

The point is if one accuses all human beings of a characteristic unless they are not a human being it must include themselves It was directed at the statement : We all have psychological flaws - every single one of us Whether such a statement is true or not the one who makes the statement is claimi...

how should others approach someone with a psychological flaw We all have psychological flaws - every single one of us Some are more extreme than others but none of us is without them So its not something only some have and not others for it is our flaws that actually make us human And less someones...

The idea is that mans attempt to improve upon Reality [ via conceptual thought ] continues to be an abject failure Conceptual thinking takes what is and transforms it into what is thought to be [ which almost always seems to be some kind of bizarre dystopian reality ] Conceptual thinking is what ha...

You can only understand somebodys actions never their motivations There are an infinite number of reasons why people do the simplest of things therefore it is beyond human comprehension Motivations can be understood through the interpretation of emotion by using language Emotion and language are un...