Cavemen

[Philothei]

Mod hat on
There was a thread clean-up that took place in this thread. Some posts were deleted as off topic to the OP. If you wonder about your post please pm me.

And please stay on topic!!!

Mod hat off​

 

[driewerf]

LOL.

Do you claim to know more about nature than Aristotle?

Do I know more than a man who knew no computers, no telescopes of microscopes, no particle accelerators, no chromotography, spectroscopy, gel electroforese, radio activity etc?
Yes. I definitely do.

 

[driewerf]

Logic is a Greek word not an Indian word.

Allow me to quote your infallible atheist Holy Scriptures.

Wikipedia

Wikipedia is none of these.
It's just encyclopedic and as accurate as possible.
But may be is that what makes the difference between us atheists and the religious ones: the search for accuracy.

 

[Philothei]

Do I know more than an man who knew no computers, no telescopes of microscopes, no particle accelerators, no chromotography, spectroscopy, gel electroforese, radio activity etc?
Yes. I definitely do.

oh wow... really? I never met a person who was more knowledgable than someone cause he knew .....about gadgets
You have to bring forth evidence for our brains are higher in IQ for we have more.....*gadgets* ???

 

[Philothei]

Yep LOGIC is a greek word... definitely .

 

[driewerf]

Logic is a Greek word not an Indian word.

Allow me to quote your infallible atheist Holy Scriptures.

Logic, Wikipedia

oh wow... really? I never met a person who was more knowledgable than someone cause he knew .....about gadgets
You have to bring forth evidence for our brains are higher in IQ for we have more.....*gadgets* ???

These gadgets, as you name them, allow us to probe Nature deeper, and more accurate than the tools Aristotle had in his time. Had Aristotle any knwoledge of cells, DNA, Saturn's Rings, Jupiter's moons, atomic spectra, beta-decay etc? On each and every of these examples the answer is no. Did he knew kangoroos, pandas, duckbilled platypus, ice bears etc? Again, no. So yes. We know more about nature than he did. And these "gadgets" helped a lot.

 

[Nathan Poe]

oh wow... really? I never met a person who was more knowledgable than someone cause he knew .....about gadgets
You have to bring forth evidence for our brains are higher in IQ for we have more.....*gadgets* ???

Ah, but any of those gadgets can bring up everyhing Aristotle knew in a matter of hours.

Consider -- Aristotle took a lifetime to learn what he knew: Any of us can get to the same point with a trip to the library, or even some time on Google.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Ah, but any of those gadgets can bring up everyhing Aristotle knew in a matter of hours.

Consider -- Aristotle took a lifetime to learn what he knew: Any of us can get to the same point with a trip to the library, or even some time on Google.

I really don't know what to say to someone who honestly thinks they can absorb the complete works of Aristotle in a matter of hours. Either (1) you are the greatest genius who ever walked the face of the Earth or (2) you must have a very high opinion of yourself. I guess if I had to pick I would go with option 2.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I really don't know what to say to someone who honestly thinks they can absorb the complete works of Aristotle in a matter of hours.

I didn't say a person could absorb it -- only that they could find it. "Absorbing" it might take a few months of spare time.

Still, it was darn thoughtful of Aristotle to write down everything he knew that he considered worth knowing so that the rest of us could surpass him without much difficulty.

 

[Tomatoman]

AofS:

I really don't know what to say to someone who honestly thinks they can absorb the complete works of Aristotle in a matter of hours.

I think we can surmise from the above that you're finding the works of Aristotle something of a challenge, Agonaces, old thing. Chin up, you'll get there in the end, probably. Remember, the race isn't always to the swiftest, but it helps if your legs point in the same direction. Wise words indeed!

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

I didn't say a person could absorb it -- only that they could find it. "Absorbing" it might take a few months of spare time.

Well I guess all the Aristotle academics and scholars who spend their lives reading and rereading Aristotle are just wasting their time. What morons! And I guess when Allan Bloom said that the Great Books are infinitely readable what he really meant was that you only had to spend a few months on them and then you can just throw them away.

Still, it was darn thoughtful of Aristotle to write down everything he knew that he considered worth knowing so that the rest of us could surpass him without much difficulty.

LOL. Well certainly his ego has been surpassed without much difficulty.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Well I guess all the Aristotle academics and scholars who spend their lives reading and rereading Aristotle are just wasting their time.

Indeed -- but it's their own time, so who are we to tell them what to do with it?

What morons! And I guess when Alan Bloom said that the Great Books are infinitely readable what he really meant was that you only had to spend a few months on them and then you can just throw them away.

I find Huckleberry Finn to be infinitely readable -- but I already know the story.

LOL. Well certainly his ego has been surpassed without much difficulty.

Except for the "difficulty" of not treating him as an infallible demigod. Fortunately, people with this difficulty, while pitiful, are few and far between.

 

[Philothei]

AofS:


I think we can surmise from the above that you're finding the works of Aristotle something of a challenge, Agonaces, old thing. Chin up, you'll get there in the end, probably. Remember, the race isn't always to the swiftest, but it helps if your legs point in the same direction. Wise words indeed!

I still think that he can honestly compared maybe to Einstein and even him I would not say that technology helped him a bit...Minds like them are not born everyday... Also ARistotele was a philosopher not a scientist

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Indeed -- but it's their own time, so who are we to tell them what to do with it?

I have a suspicion that they get something new out of it with each reading.

I find Huckleberry Finn to be infinitely readable -- but I already know the story.

Great book! Do you get something new out of it each time? Maybe think about or consider things you hadn't thought of before?

Except for the "difficulty" of not treating him as an infallible demigod. Fortunately, people with this difficulty, while pitiful, are few and far between.

Fair point.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I have a suspicion that they get something new out of it with each reading.


Great book! Do you get something new out of it each time? Maybe think about or consider things you hadn't thought of before?

Fair point -- but the words on the page never change from one reading to the next; it's the reader that has changed. The reader brings something new from their own experiences every time they read, and it's from that synthesis that something new comes.

 

[Orogeny]

Great book! Do you get something new out of it each time? Maybe think about or consider things you hadn't thought of before?

That can be said about almost any book. I read Dr. Seuss's Oh, the places you'll go! several times last spring and got a lot more out of the 4th reading than I did the first.

That's not a joke, BTW. Dead serious. That book is worth a read, folks.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Fair point -- but the words on the page never change from one reading to the next; it's the reader that has changed. The reader brings something new from their own experiences every time they read, and it's from that synthesis that something new comes.

I agree...

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

That can be said about almost any book.

Depends on whether or not you like Jane Austen, Marcel Proust, and William James...

Some books, I don't think there's any question, should be committed to the flames...

I read Dr. Seuss's Oh, the places you'll go! several times last spring and got a lot more out of the 4th reading than I did the first.

That's not a joke, BTW. Dead serious. That book is worth a read, folks.

 

[Skaloop]

oh wow... really? I never met a person who was more knowledgable than someone cause he knew .....about gadgets
You have to bring forth evidence for our brains are higher in IQ for we have more.....*gadgets* ???

Who said anything about IQ? I just know more about nature than Aristotle. That doesn't mean I am more intelligent than him, I just know more about certain things, thanks to centuries of advancement in human knowledge.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Who said anything about IQ? I just know more about nature than Aristotle. That doesn't mean I am more intelligent than him, I just know more about certain things, thanks to centuries of advancement in human knowledge.

Which is exactly how human knowledge advances -- take what the people before you knew; discard what they were wrong about, and build on what they were right about.