RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
simplicity wrote: ↑Thu Nov 18, 2021 7:28 pm
If the purpose of modern life is in achieving some semblance of happiness/contentment, philosophical inquiry is not going to get you there [although it can point in the correct direction]. I don't know about the rest of you, but in my experience, the intellectual folks are almost always over there in the corner hiding from just about everything [that matters].
The intellect is a wonderful tool for practical matters, but as a portal to something beyond getting the toast right, the intellect has little to nothing to offer.
There is nothing wrong with the human intellect. What's wrong is how philosophers have corrupted it.
What is 'human intellect', to you, EXACTLY?
And, how, EXACTLY, could some people who are just known as and called "philosophers" corrupt 'human intellect', itself?
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
The following is from the beginning of an article entitled: "
Bad Philosophy—There Is No Good Philosophy"
Well it would NOT take a genius to work out which "side" the writer of this book was influenced to.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
"Philosophy consists very largely of one philosopher arguing that all others are jackasses. He usually proves it, and I should add that he also usually proves that he is one himself." —H. L. Mencken
There was NO need to add the last part, and the first part spoke for itself.
Did that one who wrote that EVER explain what 'philosophy' IS, and, what a 'philosopher IS, EXACTLY, to them?
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
Bad Philosophers
With rare exception, the entire corpus of recorded philosophy is utterly useless.
Well that is ONE view and "side".
Also, maybe this is a GREAT EXAMPLE of one who was NOT ABLE to read a couple of paragraphs and gain a 'deep understanding' of the subject-matter.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
The only exceptions are Aristotle, Peter Abelard (with reservation) and John Locke (with reservation). All the rest are not only wrong but so distort truth that to be influenced by any of them is tantamount to self-induced insanity.
Well talk about a GREAT EXAMPLE of just how CLOSED some people REALLY were, and STILL ARE, in the days when this was being written.
And, did this one EVER explain what 'truth' they were referring to, which was, supposedly, so distorted, by "others"?
If no, then WHY NOT? What were they 'trying to' HIDE?
Also, it is VERY EASY and VERY SIMPLE to make the CLAIM that it is "others" who "so distort truth" but NEVER actually PROVIDE their OWN (distorted?) truth, to be LOOKED AT and DISCUSSED.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
All philosophers are bad, but the worst are Plato, Rene Descartes, Spinoza, George Berkeley, David Hume, Immanuel Kant, Edmund Burke, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Hegel, Arthur Schopenhauer. Auguste Comte, Søren Kierkegaard, William James, Friedrich Nietzsche, John Dewey, Bertrand Russell, Martin Heidegger, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Karl Popper, Willard Quine, A.J. Ayer, John Austin, Thomas Kuhn, Paul Feyerabend, Avram Noam Chomsky, Ronald Myles Dworkin, and Roger Penrose.
These are the worst because they have, historically, most influenced what is called philosophy today and are held as authorities in philosophical matters. The philosophy of today, which they spawned and made possible, is a total disaster.
Did this one EVER INFORM 'you' of what IS the non-disastrous philosophy?
If no, then did you EVER wonder WHY NOT?
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
The worst of all philosophy today is what is being promoted in every academic institution, including every logical positivist: including Moritz Schlick, Rudolf Carnap, Herbert Feigl, and Friedrich Waismann; every cultural Marxist: (critical theory, Frankfurt School), including Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Friedrich Pollock, Erich Fromm, Walter Benjamin. Ernst Bloch, and Jürgen Habermas; and every post modernist: including: Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Jean-François Lyotard, Richard Rorty, Jean Baudrillard, Fredric Jameson, and Douglas Kellner.
Finally there are the millions of little philosopherets—every professor, psychologist, economist, social/political ideologist, pseudo-scientist, and religious teacher who dabbles in, "philosophy."
This one appears to NOT YET EVEN KNOW what 'philosophy', itself, IS or refers to.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
Bad Philosophy
Philosophy was originally defined as, "love of wisdom," meaning that kind of knowledge required for living successfully as a human being.
This one here is, OBVIOUSLY, speaking from what it ASSUMES is true, right, and correct, but which, just as OBVIOUS, could be False, Wrong, and Correct.
Also, that could NOT mean what they have CLAIMED it does here.
So, this one is CLEARLY Wrong on one part and COULD BE just as Wrong on the other part. Which is NOT a very good way to start some writings.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
It originally included all knowledge, like the physical sciences.
OBVIOUSLY, Wrong AGAIN.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
As the successful branches of intellectual inquiry (like the sciences) were established, philosophy was refined to mean those aspects of knowledge that were fundamental to all other knowledge.
Did this one explain what 'intellectual inquiry' meant or refer to, to them?
Again, if no, then WHY NOT?
And, just like the word 'philosophy' evolved and was refined to means things, which it OBVIOUSLY did NOT once mean, just like this writer is refining the word 'philosophy' to mean and refer to what it wants that word to mean and refer to, so to have "other" human beings done the EXACT SAME thing.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
While the sciences were discovering the nature of the physical universe,
If the so-called "sciences" 'were' discovering some 'thing', then this infers that they had ALREADY discovered that 'thing', and, unless I have NOT YET been INFORMED, the discovery of the nature of the physical Universe has NOT YET occurred by 'you', human beings, in the days when this is being written, correct?
So, this appears to be Wrong written also. But if it is NOT, then I am SURE one of 'you' will correct 'me' here.
By the way, discovering the ACTUAL nature of the physical Universe is an extremely VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY thing to do.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
philosophers were attempting to identify the nature of existence itself and what reality is (metaphysics); what the nature of material existence, the physical, living, conscious, and mental are (ontology); what the nature of knowledge itself is (epistemology); what principles determined how individuals must guide their lives to live successfully (ethics); how human beings must relate to each other (politics); and the ultimate nature of purpose, value, and happiness (aesthetics).
Do ONLY so-called "philosophers" do this?
And, did you ever find out what a "philosophers" was EXACTLY, to this writer?
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
While the sciences have been phenomenally successful,
philosophy is a complete failure.
Well that is ONE WAY of LOOKING AT and SEEING things here.
But, what this just highlights, to some, is just how BLINDED this one REALLY WAS, or STILL IS, by their 'confirmation biases'.
And, if the so-called "sciences" have been, supposedly, "phenomenally successful", then in regards to 'what', EXACTLY? Hitherto when this was being written they have CERTAINLY NOT discovered the nature of the physical Universe. Or, have they?
If they have, then what, EXACTLY, IS the nature of the physical Universe?
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
Instead of discovering and explaining the ultimate nature of existence and reality, philosophy denies the existence the sciences study is real and describes reality as an illusion.
Wow this one seems to have REALLY changed what the meaning of the word 'philosophy' refers to. And, it appears they have done so to fit it in with their own, distorted, BELIEFS and ASSUMPTIONS. Which is just a seemingly "natural" occurrence among 'you', adult human beings, anyway, in the days when this was being written.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
Instead of discovering and describing the nature of reality that makes it knowable, philosophy denies that reality can ever be truly known.
I did NOT KNOW that 'philosophy' could, supposedly, deny ANY thing, itself.
This writer appears to be so sucked into its OWN BELIEFS and ASSUMPTIONS that it has changed the ACTUAL possibility of things around so much that it does NOT even seem to KNOW what it is saying and talking about here.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
Instead of discovering and describing the nature of knowledge, philosophy denies that any certain knowledge is possible.
Does this one mean that it is "philosophers", and only some of them, who deny that some knowledge, like certainty, is possible?
Is this what this one is 'trying to' say here, or does this one REALLY mean that 'philosophy', itself, REALLY does deny CERTAIN things?
By the way, if ANY one, label "philosopher" or not, denies that 'any certain knowledge' is possible, then just provide a sound AND valid argument, then the discuss would be OVER, as the CLAIM would have been PROVED True, already.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
Instead of discovering and describing the principles by which individuals can guide their lives successfully, philosophy denies there are such principles or reduces them to some kind of mystic mandates or mere custom.
AGAIN, this is just another GREAT EXAMPLE of 'confirmation biases' AT WORK.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
Instead of discovering and describing how individual human beings must relate to one another, philosophy regards individuals as having no value or meaning except as members of some social collectives, from tribes, to states, to mankind.
What is the "must" here in relation to, EXACTLY?
Also, this ones CHANGED interpretation of the word 'philosophy' here completely CONTRADICTS what a LOT of people say 'philosophy' means or refers to. But anyway, each to their own.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
Instead of discovering and describing a life that is worth living and how to achieve it, philosophy denies that true success and happiness are possible and reduces human life to a constant battle against evil.
.....
Is this REALLY what 'philosophy' DENIES?
And, if yes, then WHY do some of 'you', human beings, sign up to STUDY 'philosophy'?
What is 'it', EXACTLY, that these ones want to learn, and KNOW?
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
You are right. That kind of philosophy, which happens to be what is taught and promoted in every academic institution in the world, is not your friend. It is the enemy of all reason, knowledge, virtue and human success.
If that is what is being taught, and learned, by 'you', human beings, then there is NO wonder WHY 'you' had created and were living in such the mess that 'you' ALL were, back in the days when this was being written.