Page 10 of 10

Re: Free agent cannot be created

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 8:40 am
by Logik
Dimebag wrote:
Fri Jan 04, 2019 8:24 am
I guess it depends on a persons purpose for doing philosophy. If your aim is simply to debate your point ad infinitum then I guess that is being achieved, but if your aim is to have an honest conversation with the possibility of both parties learning something then I think it’s important to not keep your positions so heavily fortified in the rare event that you might have something to learn from others.

I’m not point the finger at you in particular but this conversation in general is basically like WWI trench warfare.
I don't particularly care about the honest/dishonest distinction when it comes to conversation - people are often far more ignorant than they are malicious. They don't know what they don't know.

Worse yet, those pursuing philosophy often have no clue what answers they are even looking for, nor do they recognise the flaws in their own positions.

It's like a puppy chasing its own tail. Amusing to watch, but that's about it.

Re: Free agent cannot be created

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 8:49 am
by surreptitious57

Dogmatism is the death of the intellect so philosophical openness to new ideas is more preferable

Re: Free agent cannot be created

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 9:53 am
by Logik
surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Jan 04, 2019 8:49 am

Dogmatism is the death of the intellect so philosophical openness to new ideas is more preferable
It depends on your epistemic taxonomy.

Some see dogmatism and skepticism as the only two valid epistemic positions with coherentism and foundationalism both being subsets of dogmatism.

Others would argue that coherentism, foundationalism, dogmatism and skepticism are four distinct positions in epistemology.