Philosophy Now Forum

HexHammer wrote:At the same time, if we removed all the babble heads, there would only be a few people left and the forum would die ...

No it wouldn't, it'd be a haven for those who like Philosophy. Like the babble heads you appear to equate babbling with life which is no surprise as you do a fair bit of it yourself.

uwot wrote:

HexHammer wrote:..and oh yes, what kind of job does one such as you have?

I'm not sure why you keep asking this, Mr Hammer. Still, I think you would make a splendid Village Idiot if we could just discover a village whose incumbent is less qualified than you.

I thought that honor would become you better, when have you last said something useful on this forum?

Arising_uk wrote:

HexHammer wrote:At the same time, if we removed all the babble heads, there would only be a few people left and the forum would die ...

No it wouldn't, it'd be a haven for those who like Philosophy. Like the babble heads you appear to equate babbling with life which is no surprise as you do a fair bit of it yourself.

Plz show me some of this "alleged babble", I believe I was right about this school philosophy of yours, that it was superior as you claimed, now you are just scorned and because you can't win over me intellectually, you have to stoop down to a puerile lvl.

HexHammer wrote:Plz show me some of this "alleged babble", I believe I was right about this school philosophy of yours, that it was superior as you claimed, now you are just scorned and because you can't win over me intellectually, you have to stoop down to a puerile lvl.

There you go, babble. There was no 'school of philosophy', there were just British schools who implemented lessons in thinking philosophically and then there was a study that showed that this improved the students performance in the other subjects. There was no claim of superiority other than that with respect to having discussions in schools, something you said was useful, the subject of Philosophy is the subject par excellence for such things. Your nonsense and babble is when you insist on equating philosophy forums with the subject of Philosophy and make sweeping statements about the subject with no actual experience of what a philosophical training involves, this makes you a cozy-chatter and nonsense babbler. I note that once again you ignore the point made and that was that this forum would not die if cozy-chatting nonsense babblers such as yourself left, it would just be a nice quiet place where some actual philosophical conversations might occur.

Arising_uk wrote:

HexHammer wrote:Plz show me some of this "alleged babble", I believe I was right about this school philosophy of yours, that it was superior as you claimed, now you are just scorned and because you can't win over me intellectually, you have to stoop down to a puerile lvl.

There you go, babble. There was no 'school of philosophy', there were just British schools who implemented lessons in thinking philosophically and then there was a study that showed that this improved the students performance in the other subjects. There was no claim of superiority other than that with respect to having discussions in schools, something you said was useful, the subject of Philosophy is the subject par excellence for such things. Your nonsense and babble is when you insist on equating philosophy forums with the subject of Philosophy and make sweeping statements about the subject with no actual experience of what a philosophical training involves, this makes you a cozy-chatter and nonsense babbler. I note that once again you ignore the point made and that was that this forum would not die if cozy-chatting nonsense babblers such as yourself left, it would just be a nice quiet place where some actual philosophical conversations might occur.

You never stated how they use this philosophy, so you need to expand on it, else it's no proof, since schools around the world can make good students without philosophy at all.

HexHammer wrote:You never stated how they use this philosophy, so you need to expand on it, else it's no proof, since schools around the world can make good students without philosophy at all.

Let's ask you about your experience. Have you ever studied anything after high school. If so what?
If not then tell us what your top three subjects were at school.
I'll try to demonstrate why philosophy is important to them and what it has contributed to them.

HexHammer wrote:

Arising_uk wrote:

HexHammer wrote:Plz show me some of this "alleged babble", I believe I was right about this school philosophy of yours, that it was superior as you claimed, now you are just scorned and because you can't win over me intellectually, you have to stoop down to a puerile lvl.

There you go, babble. There was no 'school of philosophy', there were just British schools who implemented lessons in thinking philosophically and then there was a study that showed that this improved the students performance in the other subjects. There was no claim of superiority other than that with respect to having discussions in schools, something you said was useful, the subject of Philosophy is the subject par excellence for such things. Your nonsense and babble is when you insist on equating philosophy forums with the subject of Philosophy and make sweeping statements about the subject with no actual experience of what a philosophical training involves, this makes you a cozy-chatter and nonsense babbler. I note that once again you ignore the point made and that was that this forum would not die if cozy-chatting nonsense babblers such as yourself left, it would just be a nice quiet place where some actual philosophical conversations might occur.

You never stated how they use this philosophy, so you need to expand on it, else it's no proof, since schools around the world can make good students without philosophy at all.

You can't make good students as they're already made.

PhilX

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

HexHammer wrote:You never stated how they use this philosophy, so you need to expand on it, else it's no proof, since schools around the world can make good students without philosophy at all.

Let's ask you about your experience. Have you ever studied anything after high school. If so what?
If not then tell us what your top three subjects were at school.
I'll try to demonstrate why philosophy is important to them and what it has contributed to them.

School are for parrots, I've by far outdid 2 people higher business exams, 5 secretaries, reduces a job they had from 8h to less than ½h, found 100 waste hour per sales person with 100++ people, I foretold just after a few months after the Berlin wall fell, that if something so terrible happens, then there would be more surveillance and less freedom, everybody said EU would go for more freedom and less surveillance and dismissed me for a fool.
I foretold ½ year before the CEO of a newspaper bought EUROMAN that he couldn't handle it, and just after 2 years he had to sell it back.
I reduced install time of PCs from 2-3h to just ca 5 min, before remote install from other PC.
I foretold that the CEO's 2 projects his expansion in EU and his internet business would fail, which they did in less than a year, and he himself would fail, after 4 years, he was demoted from CEO to director, and after 8 years in all he had thrown his entire fortune away of 3.2 billion danish crowners, and ended in a debt of 200 million danish crowner.

I'm an exceptional analyst, which neither of you are not, even tho most of you have much higher education than I, but I always outdo people with high education because they can only make parrot speeches.

HexHammer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

HexHammer wrote:You never stated how they use this philosophy, so you need to expand on it, else it's no proof, since schools around the world can make good students without philosophy at all.

Let's ask you about your experience. Have you ever studied anything after high school. If so what?
If not then tell us what your top three subjects were at school.
I'll try to demonstrate why philosophy is important to them and what it has contributed to them.

School are for parrots, s.

This is why you are so ignorant.
Never mind.

HexHammer wrote:You never stated how they use this philosophy, so you need to expand on it, else it's no proof, since schools around the world can make good students without philosophy at all.

Well ignoring that most European schools have philosophy as part of their curriculum that's not the point of your argument is it. Your argument is that teaching students philosophy assists them in no way but I've shown you a recent study over here that shows you are wrong but you are to blinkered by that chip on your shoulder to face a fact.

I foretold just after a few months after the Berlin wall fell, that if something so terrible happens, then there would be more surveillance and less freedom, everybody said EU would go for more freedom and less surveillance and dismissed me for a fool. ...

Who's this 'everyone'? I've also read from you elsewhere that you chat to 'God' who gives you your insight and apparently there was something about you saving the world or some such?

School are for parrots, I've by far outdid 2 people higher business exams, 5 secretaries, reduces a job they had from 8h to less than ½h, found 100 waste hour per sales person with 100++ people, ...

I'm an exceptional analyst, which neither of you are not, even tho most of you have much higher education than I, but I always outdo people with high education because they can only make parrot speeches.

Is that all!? I was a systems and then database analyst and designer and have put people and departments out of work thereby saving 1000 of man-hours.

And I've met poor, illiterate farmers far wiser than either of you.

The Inglorious One wrote:And I've met poor, illiterate farmers far wiser than either of you.

For once I agree. I've met dogs with more sense than Hex. At least a dog does not pretend to be a prophet.

Arising_uk wrote:

HexHammer wrote:You never stated how they use this philosophy, so you need to expand on it, else it's no proof, since schools around the world can make good students without philosophy at all.

Well ignoring that most European schools have philosophy as part of their curriculum that's not the point of your argument is it. Your argument is that teaching students philosophy assists them in no way but I've shown you a recent study over here that shows you are wrong but you are to blinkered by that chip on your shoulder to face a fact.

Dude, the reason science has replaced philosophy is because the concept of "irrefutable evidence" your "evidence" has not double blind features, it doesn't exactly in detail describe the things that makes philosophy so good.

As I've said, other students can get top grades without philosophy so your arguments are null and void in itself.

HexHammer wrote:Dude, the reason science has replaced philosophy is because the concept of "irrefutable evidence" your "evidence" has not double blind features, it doesn't exactly in detail describe the things that makes philosophy so good.

As I've said, other students can get top grades without philosophy so your arguments are null and void in itself.

But it does as not all the students take the classes and they can compare results and with results from schools that are not implementing the classes as currently they are not mandatory in english schools, they can also compare with the students previous results. It's also not about top-grades as those who get top-grades get them for a number of factors not least being the parents influence. It's about just helping the students to think rather than just work to the tests. What makes philosophical training useful is, as you agreed, having such discussions in the first place and that philosophy has the most interesting discussions, this also allows the teacher to have a ready source of material to discuss.
p.s.
Please don't call me 'dude' as I'm not an American and neither are you.

The Inglorious One wrote:And I've met poor, illiterate farmers far wiser than either of you.

Have you. Care to express their wisdom?