How do the ramblings of a syphilitic old German guy affect my daily life?

How do the ramblings of a syphilitic old German guy affect my daily life?

You'd know if you were. . .



Das Ubermensch.

Quote from: DAS B00T x2 on January 07, 2015, 10:48:56 AM

How do the ramblings of a syphilitic old German guy affect my daily life?

You'd know if you were. . .



Das Ubermensch.

But I thought the Nazi application of the ΓΌbermensch was regarded as wrong.

Some good questions from that other forum I use.

Reading your previous discussion, how do you get over the 'is -ought gap' (logically deducing moral values from facts)?

The distinction between facts and values really is a non-starter. Values must necessarily reduce to facts in some way, and values must necessarily presuppose factual inquiry. You can see this happening all throughout the history of philosophy, I've noticed. From Nietzschean Perspectivism, to R.M. Hare's idea of the "blik", to Sam Harris's ethical naturalism and to Karl Poppers judgement that all human observations are necessarily conjectural.

Do you believe in the self? Relating to the question; if every cell in my body is replaced over a stretch of a few years and then (hypothetically) those former cells appeared again in their former form which would be me? The one replaced by cells, the reappearing ones, both or neither?

I'm very much a Humean on this. Part of my problem with pretty much all religions (as well as philosophy's like Platonism and--to a lesser extent--Aristotelianism) is that they assume some sort of substance/noumenon/thing-in-itself in which the essential properties of a thing inhere, and are yet distinct from the thing-in-itself. This is just positing a non-empirical foundation to everything (this includes the ideas of a soul, or some transcendent self) whereas bundle theory makes much more sense in that the empirical togetherness of some properties engender a kind-of "perceived substance". I think the perceived substance of the "self" is defined as much by its macroscopic physical continuity as it is by its collection of subjective data.

Can we prove the external world exists?

I'm actually one with Hume on this, in that a belief in the external world cannot be justified rationally. I am, insofar as it matters, still a realist though. A sceptic, but a realist nonetheless. There are just some things that we must necessarily presuppose to be true (again, values and conjectures, as above) in order to begin any sort of inquiry. We must, for instance, presuppose that we're seeing a proper representation of the world to do anything and then value physicalism and empiricism to embark upon any truth-claims which then correlate with this representation.

How does it feel knowing that studying philosophy is equivalent to playing video games in terms of utility?

How does it feel knowing that studying philosophy is equivalent to playing video games in terms of utility?

Agreed.

Why do people revere asshats like Plato when they were wrong about everything, save for maybe feminism?

Old = gold, apparently.

Why do people actually pay for philosophy classes?

Why do people pay for art school? Why do people pay for liberal arts classes?

Quote from: Kinder Graham on January 07, 2015, 03:03:39 PM

Why do people actually pay for philosophy classes?

Why do people pay for art school? Why do people pay for liberal arts classes?

I have no idea, but it's make good for something to laugh at

Quote from: Kinder Graham on January 07, 2015, 03:10:15 PM

Quote from: Dustin xLilD on January 07, 2015, 03:08:45 PM

Quote from: Kinder Graham on January 07, 2015, 03:03:39 PM

Why do people actually pay for philosophy classes?

For me I had to as a general education requirement. It was a fun class tho

>taking general education

Why not take a program that's specific to a certain field so that you have a basic foundation for when you go onto a 4 year university?

I am in a 4 year university, that's why I'm forced into taking classes that have nothing to do with my major. I was considering to a couple years at a community college (seeing as that would be the most logical thing to do) but I wanted 'muh college experience' which doesn't exist if you're an engineering student anyway.

Ah, makes sense. The whole college experience is pretty shitty; just a bunch of immature kids paying thousands to get drunk is all. I love community college as there's plenty of older adults who don't care or want to deal with childish mischief

Then take it as a minor and major in something that will actually be of benefit

Or you could just stop being arrogant by way of thinking you can judge the "benefit" something will have to somebody, short of neurocognitive scanning.

Do you consider philosophy an essential field of study for a generally well-rounded education, or a mostly defunct school of thought that has very little place in modern academia and industry?

What's the philosophy for not giving a shit and enjoying life? Hedonism?

Epicureanism. It's like Diet Hedonism.

Should all immoral acts be made unlawful? Or what is the difference between morality and legality, at least in terms of what you would have as an unlawful act if it were your decision?

There are a great many moral norms government shouldn't enforce; they should stick to the most obvious and basic sins of 'commission', if you like.

For instance, if a doctor drugs a girl with an IQ of 130 and reduces her IQ to 70, that's worse than if a girl with an IQ of 70 isn't given a drug which'd raise her IQ to 130--despite the result being numerically identical.