FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 10:50 am
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 9:58 am
That said: again, it's strange that you are calling something dead that includes Wittgenstein's later philosophers, in specific language games and forms of life.
I thought it was weirder still that the "death of analytic philosophy" thing he pasted without thinking much makes a big deal of analytic philosophy placing too muchfaith in science to answer all types of question, but he's obsesses with science as the most credible and his entire morality-proper thing is predicated so heavily on mimicking science for its methodology that he has been known to argue that if you don't believe it you must also not believe in science.
Yes, there's that also.
He finds things that seem to support one position of his or attack a position of Peter H.
He posts these, it seems with out reading them careful.
Then he has to spend months, given that he can't say 'hm, good point', putting out fires.
The last couple of weeks he's tossed a bunch of stuff out that will be very hard for him to integrate with other positions he has.
I'd say there are four main issues:
1) throws stuff out without carefully reading or thoughts about how it fits with other things
2) appeals to authority - here in the last, he 'notes' the demise of OLP based on one article. Later he will link to this as having demonstrated it. 'I already demonstrated/stated/showed.
3) no real justificiations, usually strings of assertions.
4) responses are reassertions - you often can't tell if he even read and/or understood your point.