Where is the philosophy???

[Age]

Philosophy Now is a good source of research. I came in here to thank the magazine for their articles and, also, the free ones. The forum is for writing your ideas on a claim. Knowing, how to write; proves your thesis.

Is this 'sarcasm'?

If no, then what is this last sentence referring to, EXACTLY? It is CERTAINLY NOT true, AT ALL.

Also, could this forum be for ANY other 'thing'?

This is a forum. Most of the arguing turns into ad hominem because people only see their point of view.

What do you mean by 'ad hominem' here?

To me, people can turn to 'ad hominem' for OTHER reasons than just because they only see their point of view.

With evidence, you can prove anything.

Is this here some sort of 'sarcasm'?

See, with 'evidence' you can NOT necessarily 'prove' ANY 'thing', AT ALL. However, with 'evidence' you THINK you can 'prove' 'YOUR thing'. For example, 'red shift' is so-called "evidence" for some people's BELIEF that the Universe began and/or is expanding, and for these VERY BLINDED human beings they BELIEVE that the 'evidence' 'proves' 'their ASSUMPTION or BELIEF' here.

'Evidence' FOR some 'thing', however, is NOT necessarily 'proof', AT ALL, and NEVER WILL BE.

'Proof' is VERY, VERY DIFFERENT FROM 'evidence'.

'Evidence' may be A SIGN that some 'thing' is true, right, or correct, but 'evidence' is CERTAINLY NOT 'proof' that some 'thing' is true, right, NOR correct, and 'with evidence', you WILL CERTAINLY NOT EVER necessarily 'prove' ANY 'thing'.

Just because you do not view, the persuasion in writing does not mean you are wrong.

What do you mean by, 'you do not view'? EVERY one 'views'.

The 'persuasion' 'in writing' does NOT mean that you are right, EITHER.

Most of this forum is an opinion, "I could be wrong."

Could this opinion of yours, be 'wrong' here?

Thank-you for the articles in the magazine and the free one, also. The forum makes you think differently and then research the thesis; and maybe change your mind. I do, also, turn off the arguments of attacking the person rather than the idea. Persuasion is as powerful way of evidence.

This sentence does NOT make sense to me. For example, through 'persuasion' people can be LED INTO BELIEVING 'things', which are NOT true AT ALL. As evidenced and PROVED True by quite a fair bit of what is written and said, in the days when this is being written.

Now, 'evidence' IS 'evidence', and, 'persuasion' IS 'persuasion', but NEVER is 'persuasion' NECESSARILY a 'powerful way of evidence', AT ALL.

Even if you had added the word 'presenting', in between the words 'of' and 'evidence', your sentence still does NOT make FULL sense, to me.

' Presenting 'evidence' in a particular way can be VERY 'persuading' ', makes much MORE sense, well to me anyway.

Most people here are like the Cynics and are, yes, strange in their wisdom.

Is the "english language" your 'first language'?

Now who and/or what are 'the Cynics'? Or, did you mean some 'thing' like, 'Most people here, in this forum, are 'cynical', and 'are strange in their wisdom', to you?

If yes, then WILL you PROVIDE some examples of WHERE you think or BELIEVE 'the wisdom' of most of the people here, in this forum, comes across as 'strange', to you?

If no, then WHY NOT?

Are you AWARE that the way you write is NOT 'persuading', AT ALL, to some of 'us' here, and that your so-called 'wisdom' appears to be somewhat MIXED UP, TWISTED, and/or DISTORTED?

But, they have a point of view and rant, away, and most of the time in makes me feel better because I have studied in and know the difference.
Thank-you .

OF COURSE 'they' HAVE A POINT OF VIEW. EVERY human being who writes in forums like this HAVE POINTS OF VIEWS.

Could what you have been SAYING and WRITING here be coming across as just 'ranting away' also, to "others"?

WHAT have you been, supposedly, studying in, which has, supposedly, led you to, supposedly, KNOWING 'the difference'? And, what are the words 'the difference' ACTUALLY IN RELATION TO, EXACTLY, anyway?

[Age]

Pyrrhonian Skepticism is a protest not of fact but of propositions. Beliefs are just that, and disbeliefs are not propositional attitudes. What is justified and what is not justified?

What is 'justified' is 'that', which IS 'JUST'. And,

What is 'NOT justified' is 'that', which IS 'NOT JUST'.

Have you studied enough to you KNOW 'the difference' here?

What is knowledge but a personal opinion.

Was this A QUESTION, A STATEMENT OF FACT, Or just YOUR OWN PERSONAL OPINION?

We do not want our proposition postponed for explanation.

WHO, supposedly, does NOT want 'this'? And, WHY do 'you', and/or 'they', NOT want to EXPLAIN 'your/their propositions', later on?

Fact is not information in the proposition p.

So, there is NO proposition EVER spoken or written that could contain information with A Fact within the proposition, right?

We negate epistemology but the subject is an attitude. p1 and p2 are hypotheses of a variable.

Is this meant to be an example of one being 'strange in their, so-called, wisdom'?

[Agent Smith]

We must go the movies or just youtube to la la land! No, not Los Angeles, California ... la la land ... somewhere ( ) in the mediterranean sea. Quick, hurry, before you know who redoes the bloody place!!

Tickity-tockity ... tickity-tockity ... rumble, rumble ...