Jim

jakelafort wrote:
So i distinguish the two.

Yes. Got it!

jakelafort wrote:
Ethics is a matter of applied reason.

If only that were mostly so Jake. If only. This is true when we are in the realm of applied ethics, legal debates and enlightened discussion. However, ethics all to often by-pass anything we’d recognize as reason. Consider this: in a large amount of countries…the most intellectual and…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:
@davis – Jordan Peterson apparently believes they’ve been abusing a distorted version of Post Modernism.

Post modernism, in a political, identity, philosophy term…is already highly flawed and damaged goods in my opinion. Adding agressive toxic idenity-politics people who shame others for the words they choose, does not abu…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:
@davis – Everyone seems to be locked down and afraid to move in case they get accused of being sexist, racist and homophobic.

Academics and many politicians are being more careful with their words indeed. To be honest, being more considerate with how you label and identify people is in many cases a good thing. Saying: “…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:
@davis – what’s your view of the mess that the modern Left seem to have got themselves into?

There are three different questions in your text, so let me adress them separately:

The mess that we have gotten ourselves into, is turning political conversations into “the left” and “the right”. It’s mostly the fault of pol…[Read more]

@Pope tro

You’re going to have a difficult time trying to put critical thinking and post-modernesque tropes in some kind of disfunctional marriage. Critical thinking, in general, is designed to be cold hard analysis. Categorizing and reviewing the soundness of logical arguments. The multi-perspective family of methods/narratives, often tend to…[Read more]

Most of these are humanists principles, though a few of them are a little odd (touching dishes, taking sabbaticals, do not destroy). They may be good advice but I don’ understand why these are major priorities compared that what is left out, like educating others, fighting discrimination cruelty against the marginalised, loose religion, encourage…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:
If by capitalizing and adding timeless you mean to convey something supernatural then i agree it cant exist. I am referring to demonstrable behavior with malice. If you consider humans with a modicum of intelligence and absence of superstition then i think you will have near unanimity in condemning as evil the most egregious…

[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:
But sometimes people do evil things for fun, and in the present moment, it’s a successful (social) strategy for thriving, given that we are competitive as well as cooperative. But a negative payback usually comes later in some form or other. Crime doesn’t pay; it pays to be nice.

There are a few misconceptions here. The 21s…[Read more]

@Tom

Yeah, well, if a short duck and dodge is the best way to make broad criticisms of something you don’t like and avoid defending it, then a short duck and dodge is the most successful!

@Simon

This may be true in some cases where people inflict unnecessary suffering on others, but it isn’t always the case. In endless examples of a group of people stuck in a mass movement of cruel insanity…countless people take no pleasure from the horror they inflict on others, or this complicity when doing nothing. Reluctant Japanese citizens…[Read more]

@Pope. Are you auditing the course at a university or college? Is it for non-degree students?

Perhaps you have a bad teacher. I did when I first did critical thinking (got a B-) and did really well with, believe it or not, a  Catholic priest professor. The first was very extreme in his severity of differentiating sound arguments. The next taught…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:
If these famous philosophers are famous because they’re good, then it means they’re different from most people, enough to be going crazy once in a while.

They are “good” for many reasons, not necessarily because their works are relevant today. They provide insight into how and why people thought the way they did in the…[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
I will consider that profound question with the use of my 2 philosophical pencils, the ones I use when I ponder our existence. One of them is a 2B, the other one is not a 2B.

Hahahahaha. I think you should write down and sell your metaphysical/ontological/epistomological/cosmological poetry fast….before all the…

[Read more]

tom sarbeck wrote:
Davis, another predilection of philosophers is the use of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of words to remark on what non-philosophers can say in a half dozen or so.

Nice misdirect. How would you know? You know nothing about philosophy or you wouldn’t keep using these tired cliches. Plato and Kant and Heidiger and some post-modern…

[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
@davis – while a “Like” button does not exist I have conceptualized one and press it regarding your recent responses.

Now the real question is: are like buttons entities that can exist without humans?

• Nearly every field of philosophy is intimately related with some other field of study as such as law logic pedagology physics astrophysics literature politics history mathematics medicine architecture psychology sociology. A polítical science student deals with human rights in terms of its history, evolution, status, failings, how robust it is…

[Read more]

tom sarbeck wrote:
Thank you, Zweifel, for trying to prevent philosophy’s suicide.

Philosophy is alive and well and is under no threat by doubters and haters and most especially by those who don’t put any work into understanding critical approaches to universal problems. Some areas of philosophy would be best thrown down the toilet, other areas a…[Read more]