Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Intuitions and inspirations: I think that I have figured it out
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Naraoia" data-source="post: 64489423" data-attributes="member: 202689"><p>I think my general problem with philosophy is that I often don't see the point of arguing over unanswerable questions, or playing with hypotheticals that don't really help us understand anything. Solipsism would be an example of both - fine, it's logically possible that I'm a brain in a vat, but does that really change anything? One, I have no way of testing whether it is true, two, even if it is, my experience of the world remains exactly the same.</p><p></p><p>(Have you read <em>Sophie's World</em>? What struck me about that book was that every single chapter, it would convince me that yeah, this or that philosopher's idea made sense. And in the next chapter, it would do the same about <em>the exact opposite idea</em>. That really annoyed me, and the annoyance has stayed with me to this day. Encountering philosophers who tried to be all profound and insightful about science but just ended up sounding clueless probably didn't help.)</p><p> </p><p> Yes, and "umbrella" literally means "little shade". Etymology ain't everything. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p> Oh, don't get me wrong. Practise philosophy all you like. It's your right, just like it's your right to believe in God or to like cucumbers. The fact that I get grumpy about philosophy shouldn't discourage you from it any more than my dislike of cucumbers should stop you from eating them <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p> OK.</p><p> </p><p> I'm having a hard time understanding what you mean by this truth/reality that's within us. Producing art, yeah, that kind of makes sense, since art is an expression of a person's internal world. It's where you say that by observing nature we discover something within us that you lost me. Say I've discovered something about the way my worms regenerate. You're not suggesting that the worms are all in my head. So what is it that <em>is</em> within me that I've supposedly understood by experimenting on them?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Naraoia, post: 64489423, member: 202689"] I think my general problem with philosophy is that I often don't see the point of arguing over unanswerable questions, or playing with hypotheticals that don't really help us understand anything. Solipsism would be an example of both - fine, it's logically possible that I'm a brain in a vat, but does that really change anything? One, I have no way of testing whether it is true, two, even if it is, my experience of the world remains exactly the same. (Have you read [I]Sophie's World[/I]? What struck me about that book was that every single chapter, it would convince me that yeah, this or that philosopher's idea made sense. And in the next chapter, it would do the same about [I]the exact opposite idea[/I]. That really annoyed me, and the annoyance has stayed with me to this day. Encountering philosophers who tried to be all profound and insightful about science but just ended up sounding clueless probably didn't help.) Yes, and "umbrella" literally means "little shade". Etymology ain't everything. ;) Oh, don't get me wrong. Practise philosophy all you like. It's your right, just like it's your right to believe in God or to like cucumbers. The fact that I get grumpy about philosophy shouldn't discourage you from it any more than my dislike of cucumbers should stop you from eating them ;) OK. I'm having a hard time understanding what you mean by this truth/reality that's within us. Producing art, yeah, that kind of makes sense, since art is an expression of a person's internal world. It's where you say that by observing nature we discover something within us that you lost me. Say I've discovered something about the way my worms regenerate. You're not suggesting that the worms are all in my head. So what is it that [I]is[/I] within me that I've supposedly understood by experimenting on them? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Intuitions and inspirations: I think that I have figured it out
Top
Bottom