What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Discussion of articles that appear in the magazine.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Atla
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by Atla » Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:17 pm

TimeSeeker wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:13 pm
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:09 pm
Are you hallucinating again?

I didn't claim to be a philosopher, didn't say philosophy was particularly useful, and didn't claim to add to humanity much (I don't think that's possible anyway anymore).
Well, we are on a philosophy forum; and you are doing philosophy, and you DID say this:
So you are artificially trying to reinvent contextual thinking, not realizing that most other people are already automatically doing that and usually understand the shared context in philosophical discussions
So I am guessing your deflection away from the "shared context in philosophical discussions" (truth, reality) is your way of avoiding acknowledging your error? Shut up and compute!

Expanding human knowledge is happening. All the time. And not fast enough.
You are also commenting on this forum, does that automatically make you a philosopher too then? And not all philosophy is about truth, reality.

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by TimeSeeker » Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:19 pm

Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:17 pm
You are also commenting on this forum, does that automatically make you a philosopher too then?
It means I engage in philosophy. Amongst many other things. I don't know what your criteria are for bestowing the title "philosopher" upon a person.

Atla
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by Atla » Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:46 pm

TimeSeeker wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:19 pm
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:17 pm
You are also commenting on this forum, does that automatically make you a philosopher too then?
It means I engage in philosophy. Amongst many other things. I don't know what your criteria are for bestowing the title "philosopher" upon a person.
So engaging in philosophy doesn't mean that we are philosophers, but being in philosophical discussions means that we are philosophers. Got it.

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by TimeSeeker » Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:47 pm

Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:46 pm
TimeSeeker wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:19 pm
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:17 pm
You are also commenting on this forum, does that automatically make you a philosopher too then?
It means I engage in philosophy. Amongst many other things. I don't know what your criteria are for bestowing the title "philosopher" upon a person.
So engaging in philosophy doesn't mean that we are philosophers, but being in philosophical discussions means that we are philosophers. Got it.
For somebody who claims they understand context, you sure don't know how to use language colloquially.

But since you want to be pedantic. I never really called you a "philosopher" - I pointed out that you have a taxonomy in your head called "philosophical context". (your language - not mine). And you seem to have some strict rules on how philosophy should and should not be conducted. I don't seem to fit that mold and you are looking for a plausible explanation (my aspergers gave you something to pick on - my brain).

That would be called an appeal to purity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

You really seem to enjoy getting your ass kicked in arguments. Are you sure you aren't a masochist?

Atla
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by Atla » Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:59 pm

TimeSeeker wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:47 pm
For somebody who claims they understand context, you sure don't know how to use language colloquially.
Or maybe you should stop contradicting yourself, if you are that logical
But since you want to be pedantic. I never really called you a "philosopher"
Except when you did :)
I pointed out that you have a taxonomy in your head called "philosophy".
And you seem to have some strict rules on how philosophy should and should not be conducted. I don't seem to fit your mould.

That would be called an appeal to purity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
It's not that strict, just strict enough to be able to communicate with each other
You really seem to enjoy getting your ass kicked in arguments. Are you sure you aren't a masochist?
You lost every argument so far from where I stand, if you can call these arguments. It's more like amusement and curiosity for me.

From the walls of nonsensical text you produced the only actual philosophical argument I could make out so far is that morality is objective because humanity should survive, which is of course ridiculous.

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by TimeSeeker » Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:03 pm

Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:59 pm
Or maybe you should stop contradicting yourself, if you are that logical
Why?

Until somebody produces a "Theory of Everything" I reject the 'law' of non-contradiction in favor of pragmatic considerations.
I reject the law of identity and excluded middle also... (except for linguistic use)
And all man-made authorities for that matter.

That's probably a foreign concept to you :)
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:59 pm
Except when you did :)
I quickly searched through the conversation and couldn't find it. Calling you out on lying, but happy to be corrected.
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:59 pm
And you seem to have some strict rules on how philosophy should and should not be conducted. I don't seem to fit your mould.
I have strict rules on success criteria. Not on how it should be conducted. You could say - I believe in objective morality. Colloquially though - you can just call me a sanctimonious p****.
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:59 pm
You lost every argument so far from where I stand, if you can call these arguments. It's more like amusement and curiosity for me.
Right! Clearly we have different criteria for success then :)
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:59 pm
From the walls of nonsensical text you produced the only actual philosophical argument I could make out so far is that morality is objective because humanity should survive, which is of course ridiculous.
Why is it ridiculous? Or are you just going to bless us with your live suicide now? :)

Atla
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by Atla » Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:20 pm

TimeSeeker wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:03 pm
Why? I reject the 'law' of non-contradiction.
I reject all the classical laws of logic.
And all man-made authorities for that matter.

That's probably a foreign concept to you :)
Okay that's quite foreign indeed. That pretty much dismisses everything you've written so far and will write from now on.
I quickly searched through the conversation and couldn't find it. Calling you out on lying, but happy to be corrected.
Yeah yeah here are some comments addressed at me

Post by TimeSeeker » Tue Sep 18, 2018 2:42 pm
You are an idiot. A philosopher. But I repeat myself.

Post by TimeSeeker » Wed Sep 19, 2018 4:00 pm
Nothing quite like philosophers to turn trivial matters into esoteric garbage.

Post by TimeSeeker » Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:16 am
I don't expect you to do anything. Philosophers are claiming to be pursuing "truth". (...)
I have a mathematical intuition/conception - most philosophers don't. e.g your thinking is limited by your language.
I have strict rules on success criteria. Not on how it should be conducted. You could say - I believe in objective morality. Colloquially though - you can just call me a sanctimonious p****.
Belief in objective morality is nice but doesn't make it real
Right! Clearly we have different criteria for success then :)

I don't have to win arguments though. Just win.
Win at some clown contest?
Why is it ridiculous? Or are you just going to bless us with your live suicide now? :)
Just because you can't grasp the concept of "objective" either, I don't have to commit suicide.

You might also want to stop editing your comments 10 times, I won't adjust my reply to the newer versions this time

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by TimeSeeker » Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:28 pm

Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:20 pm
Okay that's quite foreign indeed. That pretty much dismisses everything you've written so far and will write from now on.
In your system of logic.

You should learn a few more logics, so you aren't stuck in the one some Greek guy proposed 3000 years ago...
We have better tools in 2018.
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:20 pm
Yeah yeah here are some comments addressed at me
Fair point.

For somebody who "understands context" you sure had to step outside of this thread to find evidence for your claim ;)
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:20 pm
Belief in objective morality is nice but doesn't make it real
Oooooh! The "real" "not real" distinction :lol: :lol: :lol:
Is time real?
Is tomorrow real?
Is the Big Bang real?
Is the law of non-contradiction real?
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:20 pm
Win at some clown contest?
If I decide to be a clown - sure! In fact - it sounds like fun. Maybe I'll add it to my TODO list.
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:20 pm
Just because you can't grasp the concept of "objective"
Any more than you can grasp the concept of "God"? Objectivity is made up. Ask a physicist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_of_reference

You've been sold snake oil... You will become a much better scientist (and human) when you learn to trust your instincts/feelings/emotions.

As per the argument in this very thread all language is value-ladden, so you can't even define "objectivity" without committing a performative contradiction!
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:20 pm
You might also want to stop editing your comments 10 times, I won't adjust my reply to the newer versions this time
I don't. Actually. I like iterating.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 2833
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:08 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by -1- » Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:34 pm

Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:20 pm
TimeSeeker wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:03 pm
Why? I reject the 'law' of non-contradiction. (ETC.)
(ETC)
Atla, I found the only way to talk to TimeWaster is not to talk to him at all.

After a brief exchange of futile brainstorming with TimeTaster (s/he stormed my brain in record time) I put TimeTeaser on Foe or iggie list.

TimeTaser is a time wasting moron, who is not even interesting to talk toe. My toe is a better conversation partner by far. And as I'm only 5'4", you can imagine how far my toe is in those interesting conversations.

Atla
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by Atla » Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:53 pm

-1- wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:34 pm
Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:20 pm
TimeSeeker wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:03 pm
Why? I reject the 'law' of non-contradiction. (ETC.)
(ETC)
Atla, I found the only way to talk to TimeWaster is not to talk to him at all.

After a brief exchange of futile brainstorming with TimeTaster (s/he stormed my brain in record time) I put TimeTeaser on Foe or iggie list.

TimeTaser is a time wasting moron, who is not even interesting to talk toe. My toe is a better conversation partner by far. And as I'm only 5'4", you can imagine how far my toe is in those interesting conversations.
That's correct. :) But my very mild interest is just psychological here, whenever I see a form of crazy I haven't seen before, I often try to figure out how it works, what makes it tick, what it could feel like. It's slightly interesting and slightly amusing for a while, and maybe sheds some new light on the potentials of the human mind. That's why I also had some conversations with people like the Johndoe, DAM, Serendipper.

As for philosophical understanding, I haven't read anything on this forum yet that I haven't already considered before. I'm just here to ramble a little about the basics of the basics cause it's fun.

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by TimeSeeker » Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:58 pm

-1- wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:34 pm
TimeTaser is a time wasting moron, who is not even interesting to talk toe. My toe is a better conversation partner by far. And as I'm only 5'4", you can imagine how far my toe is in those interesting conversations.
"You wasted my time", said the lost soul looking for je ne sais quoi, while externalising blame.

If people stated their interests/desires/intentions upfront conversations tend to be a whole lot more rewarding for both parties. Seeming as you are having a monologue with your toe, perhaps you expected me to be your sounding board? That sure seems like a waste of MY time. May I suggest a mind-hack: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_duck_debugging

I am not exactly a vending machine for 'amusement' either :lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 2833
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:08 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by -1- » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:32 am

Atla wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:53 pm
As for philosophical understanding, I haven't read anything on this forum yet that I haven't already considered before.
Almost the same for me, except for thoughts in heavily-laden theism. I don't outright reject their possible validity, much like I accept the tea-cup simile by Russel. But then again, what angers me, and angers me much -- and some astute theists have noticed it -- is when talk is composed so, that it outright rejects the possibility of non-theism.

On the other hand, I like to win arguments, not just participate in them.

Both of the above have lost their novelty value by now, and I find myself reverting to humour, which is pervasive in my life.

Unfortunately my humour is not very transparent to others, and therefore hardly anyone gets it... if I say that was a joke, then people laugh. I don't know how they receive it behind the mask of a computer screen... maybe they cry. I figure my humour as such is comparable to the logic of TimeSeeker.

I did have encountered new stuff, useful, to me unknown and digestible stuff on these forums, from the pen of uwot, or from the pen of the other guy with a similar name, but it wasn't philosophy, but physics. I learned a tremendous deal about the workings of the known universe.

And I am in contention with some of the greatest minds on some issues: one, if the physical universe (including the one beyond the known one) is infinite then they say all possible states must occur at any one given time (point or interval) and I say, no, that's not necessarily true. This is an insight issue, and it can't even be worded so that it makes an argument, either way. The other is the infinite expanse of the three-dimensional space; some deny it, I see it as self-obvious. The third is the mismanagement of the expression "expanding space". Some understand it as matter in space; some understand it as ether (as per uwot's definition) in space; so far so good, both can expand, but I don't believe that the background "space" space, that is, the three-D space that can be described by Cartesian coordinates with numbers as well as with units and numbers is capable of expanding. I see that last, third, bit, as an ultimate backdrop to compare movement and expansion against an absolute.

But people throw about expressions like "universe" and "space" without regard to the expressions' multiplicity of possible definitions. I don't like that but what can I do, a single person about it?

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by TimeSeeker » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:54 am

-1- wrote:
Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:32 am
Almost the same for me, except for thoughts in heavily-laden theism. I don't outright reject their possible validity, much like I accept the tea-cup simile by Russel. But then again, what angers me, and angers me much -- and some astute theists have noticed it -- is when talk is composed so, that it outright rejects the possibility of non-theism.
OK. Have you considered this perspective? Theism is a psychological hack for human tendency towards temporal discounting ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_preference ). We tend to want things now rather than later and so blind ourselves to things further away than one or two life-spans into the future.

That's an erudite way of saying "cure for short-sightedness".

The Flood story (metaphorical). Warns against natural disasters and mother nature. Which harms us far more than we harm each other! But they are infrequent - so we forget about them and focus on the every-day stuff.

Hell (metahphorical). Warns against what happens AFTER you die. So you consider long-term consequences of your actions.
Heaven (metaphorical). Reward in the afterlife. So you have something to look forward to after death.

God is an idea. You can't see it. You can't touch it. It's no more or no less "real" than the idea of humanity.
But it's useful! Because human psychology.

Now, consider that the Bible was written 2000 years ago.
How do you convince a bunch of apes who can't see no further than their noses that something they can't see, touch, taste, feel OR conceive is actually trying to kill them! Our evolutionary wiring makes us jump to noises-in-bushes. We don't live in that world any more. Moral concerns that deal with "humans, please don't hurt me" are concerns for a bygone era!

This pursuit for "realism" is a dead end! It's turtles all the way down into the quantum fields.

It is on this very forum that somebody argued with me that "entropy is not real - it's just an abstraction". Yes! Nobody knows what entropy is. All we know is how to approximate it and measure it. Complexity science and all that.

So how do I convince you, in 2018 that this "just abstraction" kills more human beings than humans do!

Here's how: Statistically it's very likely that we live in a computer simulation. Because that's the only way we can control time - to invent it!
So if you are in The Matrix right now, there might just be an after-life ;)

Atla
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by Atla » Fri Sep 21, 2018 12:00 pm

-1- wrote:
Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:32 am
I did have encountered new stuff, useful, to me unknown and digestible stuff on these forums, from the pen of uwot, or from the pen of the other guy with a similar name, but it wasn't philosophy, but physics. I learned a tremendous deal about the workings of the known universe.
Well I consider uwot to have a late 19th - early 20th century view, (non-)interpretation of physics and the world. But there was a major revolution since then, that largely went under the radar. I think now that earlier view is a "special case" seen through a "special lens".
And I am in contention with some of the greatest minds on some issues: one, if the physical universe (including the one beyond the known one) is infinite then they say all possible states must occur at any one given time (point or interval) and I say, no, that's not necessarily true. This is an insight issue, and it can't even be worded so that it makes an argument, either way.
Well I think "time" is probably just some apparent feature of a part of our (apparent) universe, so not relevant here. And no one can be certain either what "infinite" actually could mean, maybe there are states we think are part of it but aren't. Or maybe the world is just really big but not infinite.

Personally I think it's infinite, and spent the last few years thinking about the parts of it where the infinite could sort of "loop through" itself while also being itself; and calculating the relative probabilities of such loops. What else could better naturally explain our world and human existence. Unfortunately I have never seen anyone else philosophize about this. Maybe I'm totally wrong but I think this is where it's most likely at.
The other is the infinite expanse of the three-dimensional space; some deny it, I see it as self-obvious.
I don't think infinite expanse is logically possible, but who knows, maybe the world isn't logical (whatever that means). I currently think that time probably goes in circle, and our part of the Universe will fall back into a singularity, which is one and the same singularity as the one it came from (the rate of expansion has already changed several times according to our models, so why couldn't it also reverse).

If I try to imagine infinite expanse, well.. maybe it's possible logically, but maybe that might mean that the entirety of infinity is infinitely looping through itself. I think that would mean that infinity is less than infinite, not containing parts where it doesn't loop through itself, but maybe I'm wrong. Also, something about the hypothesized looping seems to be centered on humans, but in an infinite expanse looping picture, I don't see why anything would be centered on humans.

Anyway this is all extremely speculative. :)
The third is the mismanagement of the expression "expanding space". Some understand it as matter in space; some understand it as ether (as per uwot's definition) in space; so far so good, both can expand, but I don't believe that the background "space" space, that is, the three-D space that can be described by Cartesian coordinates with numbers as well as with units and numbers is capable of expanding. I see that last, third, bit, as an ultimate backdrop to compare movement and expansion against an absolute.
I don't know how to put it, I see all of these as one and the same thing. But we have to divide it into 2-3 different components to be able to meaningfully talk about it. But space by itself is definitely not some separate component, that can curve or expand by itself or whatever.

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: What is Derrida Saying to Us?

Post by TimeSeeker » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:50 pm

There are no infinities. To believe in infinities is to believe in Gods. Because time is finite - the heat death of the universe is maximum entropy. Nothing "changes" after that. Time "stops".

Quantum physicists hate infinities too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renormalization

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests