Philosophy

[Binzhoubum]

Oh sure, but that would be like me holding up the corpse of logical positivism as an example of where the analytics can go wrong. These things tend to progress. It's probably just distinctions of the various places we choose to draw the boundaries of reality. I guess I'm more prone to agree in some ways with krishnamurti. And just hope to see the bigger picture afterall.

Wittgenstein is good for the soul because not even Wittgenstein knows how to explain himself.

As for Quine (and Davidson), absolutely we have this great shared language and no way to explain where it comes from. I just think that calls for a reexamination of phenomenology (perhaps in the context of existentialism or post-structualism) as a coming to terms with the precise spot in which we as subjective individuals plug ourselves into existence.

I think the more contemporary views in both analytic and continental philosophies are starting to re-integrate the two sides of the dualism between mental and physical. To create a role for the individual as the intersection between awareness of the world and awareness of the self. Which of course, is all very Kantian.

I guess I was under the impression that most analytic philosophers were physicalists and therefore didn't buy into dualism.

Kant...he is a genius, but...WHEW! Talk about dry.

Don't bring the Vienna Circle into this discussion please! Besides that mistake was recognized. :thumbsup:

Yeah, I agree with you. Let's just give Krishnamurti a chance.

Smoke one with me man... :smokin: .... :smokin: .... :stoned:

[Polymirize]

I guess I was under the impression that most analytic philosophers were physicalists and therefore didn't buy into dualism.

I'm under the same impression, I however just don't find physicalism to be a coherent position. The whole casual closure of the physical. I mean, the placebo effect alone seems to stand as a case of mental causation affecting the physical, instead of the other way around.

Let it be known to all, discussion of the Vienna circle will result in ridicule, although discussion of influences such as Frege, Russell and Wittgenstein may still be permitted. Case by case basis...

Nothing like blazin' and just letting the thoughts free-flow huh?

So Binzhoubum, what are your philosophical areas of interest?

[Binzhoubum]

I'm under the same impression, I however just don't find physicalism to be a coherent position. The whole casual closure of the physical. I mean, the placebo effect alone seems to stand as a case of mental causation affecting the physical, instead of the other way around.

Let it be known to all, discussion of the Vienna circle will result in ridicule, although discussion of influences such as Frege, Russell and Wittgenstein may still be permitted. Case by case basis...

Nothing like blazin' and just letting the thoughts free-flow huh?

So Binzhoubum, what are your philosophical areas of interest?

:stoned:

May I preface this post by saying that I have been smoking this http://boards.cannabis.com/showthread.php?t=72242...and I don't believe my thought are extremely clear at this point....so please bear with me. Thanks!:thumbsup:

Polymirize: My areas of interest during my philosophy studies were concentrated in the fields of analytic philosophy of mind and language; however, during my last semester in university I found a deep interest in Foucault's works.

Right now I am living in Asia....traveling around....thinking about most everything I learned and trying to apply it somehow...:smokin:

I am glad that you recognize the importance of philosophers such as Frege, Russell, and Wittgenstein....Sometimes I just like to tease the Continentals...:dance: ...I tend to lean towards Analytic conclusions in contemporary philosophy because I find that it meshes better with my currently held scientific beliefs.

Yet, I can't completely deny that Continental philosophy does appeal to me in some ineffable manner. I DO believe there is something greater than the physical, but I am waiting for some type of solid evidence to devote myself to it....

:smokin:

[Polymirize]

Yet, I can't completely deny that Continental philosophy does appeal to me in some ineffable manner. I DO believe there is something greater than the physical, but I am waiting for some type of solid evidence to devote myself to it....

empirical evidence of the non-empirical nature of reality? What would that even look like? It would have to be beyond definition, or at least beyond description within the empirical linguistic framework.

I'd never try to argue with good science, I just like to call it to task when it tries to overstep its boundaries.

Asia? damn man, that sounds pretty sweet. You should check out the Buddhist metaphysics (as metaphor if you like) while you're over there.

My own focus is more on identity and ethics, but language has just become this inescapable force within the analytic tradition now, probably because it's used to talk about... well, everything.

:thumbsup:

[OnionsOfLove]

Binzhoubum:

Just because you are not experiencing any direct stimulus does not necessarily entail that nothing is happening.

Key words: "not necessarily"

[Binzhoubum]

empirical evidence of the non-empirical nature of reality? What would that even look like? It would have to be beyond definition, or at least beyond description within the empirical linguistic framework.

I'd never try to argue with good science, I just like to call it to task when it tries to overstep its boundaries.

Asia? damn man, that sounds pretty sweet. You should check out the Buddhist metaphysics (as metaphor if you like) while you're over there.

My own focus is more on identity and ethics, but language has just become this inescapable force within the analytic tradition now, probably because it's used to talk about... well, everything.

:thumbsup:

Maybe I should have said I was waiting in vain...

:smokin:

[flamingskullballs]

Yes it would, Friendowl. Noise is caused by the vibration of anything longitudinally. Shake your hand back and forth really hard but in a large arc. You just made a deafening noise even though you couldn't hear it. So, if a tree falls down and it vibrates from the impact which vibrates the air around it, it makes a sound. Even if there was no one there to hear it.

that particular question is not about absolute answeres...its about absence

its more of, if we didnt exist, would the world exist?

[afghooey]

Yes it would, Friendowl. Noise is caused by the vibration of anything longitudinally. Shake your hand back and forth really hard but in a large arc. You just made a deafening noise even though you couldn't hear it. So, if a tree falls down and it vibrates from the impact which vibrates the air around it, it makes a sound. Even if there was no one there to hear it.

Actually, until it comes into contact with and is interpreted by an eardrum, it would simply be a vibration, and not technically a sound, right?

Point being, the cause of a sound is irrelevant. The fact that it's heard is what makes it a sound.

[flamingskullballs]

Actually, until it comes into contact with and is interpreted by an eardrum, it would simply be a vibration, and not technically a sound, right?

Point being, the cause of a sound is irrelevant. The fact that it's heard is what makes it a sound.

you are BOTH getting the Koan wrong!!!

"if a tree falls, and no body is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"

it is simply a metaphor of existance...it says that if we dont exist, nothing is able to exist

and this not only applies to us, but everything else

light cannot be without dark, love without hate, et cetera et cetera
if you where never initiated into creation, would there be an existance you are missing out on?

instead...all that you need to know about philosophy, penguin, is this:

philosophy is science applied in all directions, as science is philosophy around one general idea