Philosophy Now Forum

PeteJ wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2019 2:57 pm

-1- wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:37 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:51 pm As someone who believes in the greater good, I suggest shutting down this forum.

Although I believe also in the lesser good, I concur.

The theists are dissatisfied with the site.

The non-theists are dissatisfied with it.

Those who think logically and also those who do not think logically are dissatisfied with it.

The smart ones, not so smart ones, and less smart ones are dissatisfied with what's going on.

Or maybe it's just me, maybe it's just that I've hung around too long...

Sounds like a typical philosophy site. How else is it going to be?

Well... we could organize a movement to line all philosophers against the wall, and shoot them, except for me, of course.

The problem with philosophy is that there are barriers of faith, IQ, education, and psychology, the differentness of which can't be bridged or broken through, and therefore dialogue devolves very quickly to smelly shit.

-1- wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2019 10:32 pmThe problem with philosophy is that there are barriers of faith, IQ, education, and psychology, the differentness of which can't be bridged or broken through, and therefore dialogue devolves very quickly to smelly shit.

Getting over these barriers is what philosophy is for, and it's never going to be easy.

PeteJ wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:26 am

-1- wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2019 10:32 pmThe problem with philosophy is that there are barriers of faith, IQ, education, and psychology, the differentness of which can't be bridged or broken through, and therefore dialogue devolves very quickly to smelly shit.

Getting over these barriers is what philosophy is for, and it's never going to be easy.

That's true. It's also true that "impossible" is a proper subset of "not easy" if you attempt the impossible.

-1- wrote: ↑Fri May 31, 2019 5:59 pm

PeteJ wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:26 am

-1- wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2019 10:32 pmThe problem with philosophy is that there are barriers of faith, IQ, education, and psychology, the differentness of which can't be bridged or broken through, and therefore dialogue devolves very quickly to smelly shit.

Getting over these barriers is what philosophy is for, and it's never going to be easy.

That's true. It's also true that "impossible" is a proper subset of "not easy" if you attempt the impossible.

It gets even harder when you can't even tell the difference between "possible" and "impossible".

Like when you believe that omniscience is possible.

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool. --Richard Feynman

I'm relatively new to the magazine, so forgive me if this has been done/suggested already.

I'd love to see a historical issue. Something that focuses more on the historical progression of ideas with their roots. I think understanding the people and the circumstances that the ideas came from help us to understand the ideas themselves. Also, it helps to give a framework of where/how the ideas started and what was it that made them change.

Although the magazine is called Philosophy Now it doesnt merely deal with everything contemporary
Its subject matter extends all the way back to antiquity so it is by default historical despite the title

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2019 12:00 pm Although the magazine is called Philosophy Now it doesnt merely deal with everything contemporary
Its subject matter extends all the way back to antiquity so it is by default historical despite the title

I should add to this that the Magazine also stays away from publishing any new ideas or newly developed theories, as it its editorial board is too cowardly to stick its neck out.

There is nothing new in this Magazine, other than the B-material articles written by failing Ph.D.-s who are pressed to publish, and they figure this is a good place for their crappiest writings.

I must say Will Bouwman is a shining exception to this rule. Will's articles are all well-written, informative, and readable. He is a good writer as well as a person with valuable knowledge and opinions of and on philosophical topics. (Not to misconstrue "off and on philosophical topics".)

Philosophy prior to the presocratics has to be explored more.

Studying conceptual nature of the logical objects would be excellent.

When was the publication date, please? Thank-you for the article and magazine.
Work Cited
Cruz, Joe, B-Gray, Tim, Lewis, Rick. “Knowledge and Reasons,” Philosophy Now, Issue Four,
Anja Publications Ltd, Page 14, Digital. 3/2/2022 CE.

Thank-you as you are the source of thinking. Directing, to books for sources and articles that inform. From an Academic: Thank-you so very much for what you had done for me-in the past, present, and, yes, future. The busser/philosopher, thanks, again

Please set a limit to the number of threads a user can create within a month (4 should suffice!)

God bothering characters like dattaswami are ruining the forum.

I agree. And limit the number of posts glorifying mass murdering perverts like Ted Bundy. Not mentioning any names, but rhymes with 'bro meet me in'.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 04, 2023 10:45 pm Please set a limit to the number of threads a user can create within a month (4 should suffice!)

God bothering characters like dattaswami are ruining the forum.

I think that's a great idea.

It seems unreasonable for anyone to be able to continually flood the forum with their excess.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Jan 05, 2023 3:56 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 04, 2023 10:45 pm Please set a limit to the number of threads a user can create within a month (4 should suffice!)

God bothering characters like dattaswami are ruining the forum.

I think that's a great idea.

It seems unreasonable for anyone to be able to continually flood the forum with their excess.

I second the motion!