Originally posted by Philosophicus
Fire, you say: "Well everyone is entitled to post their opinions and ideas ..." In other words I am entitled to give my opinions as well - by the way, it's in fact my (an) opinion to deem other opinions as idiotic, as well as to say what we can and can not afford - that's opinion as well - and you say everyone is entitled to it - so I'm entitled to any opinion I have.
Ahhh...this is refreshing! So many people who populate these kind of forums simply just want to hear mundane platitudes and recieve literary hugs...it's all sooooooooooooooooo boring! In the 'real' world, people don't tolerate people who say ridiculous things, so why should they be tolerated in cyber space?!?!
On this topic, I stand united with Philosophicus...at least his posts - while boardering on the pompous - incite some actual thinking, rather than some thread that contains people posting nothing more than the next number in the sequence!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now, that is something to be angry about.
On this topic, I stand united with Philosophicus...at least his posts - while boardering on the pompous - incite some actual thinking, rather than some thread that contains people posting nothing more than the next number in the sequence!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!hmm strange cause I find his post rather boring and full of swada and with no concept to the real world we live in. Reagardless of how well he formulate himself a tree that falls unwitnessed falls regardless of how philisophical one try to twist it.
people posting nothing more than the next number in the sequence!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now, that is something to be angry about.well why dont you insult each other trough PMs then, that must be a refreshing aproach for the likes of you
Originally posted by finti
hmm strange cause I find his post rather boring and full of swada and with no concept to the real world we live in. Reagardless of how well he formulate himself a tree that falls unwitnessed falls regardless of how philisophical one try to twist it.well why dont you insult each other trough PMs then, that must be a refreshing aproach for the likes of you
It's part of the beauty of insight that remarks by philospohers can transcend threads, topics, spaces, times and all that is in-between...
Your post brings Plato to mind once again...
'Ignorance, the root and stem of every evil.'
Although, I feel it is pertinent to observe that 'evil' should be substituted for 'stupidity'. If you fail to understand something, try harder...don't just take a break on Ignorance Island...knowledge is for everyone and it costs nothing!
My post had nothing to do with simple 'flaming' - that is as mindless as the counting games - merely that thoughts and opinions are subject to judgements based on a perceived 'quality' or a lack there of...
oh I just love wanna be philosophers
Although, I feel it is pertinent to observe that 'evil' should be substituted for 'stupidity'. If you fail to understand something, try harder...don't just take a break on Ignorance Island...knowledge is for everyone and it costs nothing!to be a of an opposite view has never been ignorance, to be arrogant though is a form of ignorance. Ignorance in the sense that one miss or openly overlook the fact that one might not be so smart as one try to portray.
Originally posted by finti
oh I just love wanna be philosophersto be a of an opposite view has never been ignorance, to be arrogant though is a form of ignorance. Ignorance in the sense that one miss or openly overlook the fact that one might not be so smart as one try to portray.
Either you are being very, very, very, very ironic...or you just posted a big load of nonsense-infused crapola...
Me thinks the latter...
Is there some way that you couldn'T be so damn annoying, we all know that its very unlikely that one of us got the complete truth on his site, everyone got his theory, so maybe we could just try to keep this on some kind of fair level, regardless of how stupid we think the posts of the other person is?
Really Philosophy is not aboot being right or wrong its aboot cultivating once mind and practicing thinking. I, as probably most of you, got many theories on different subjects, though I would never claim that my theory is the truth, cause quite frankly I don'T know, so I wouldn't call anyone an idiot for another view. Maybe we could keep it decent.
Excuse me if I am missing something from the past couple of posts, but when it turned into a discussion of freedom of speech I lost interest and skipped a few pages. I would first off like to point that in this regard, freedom of speech is not truly real. If you wish to be a part of this organization, you follow the rules set forth by it. This forum is an organization. If they would like for you to be polite and courteous, you can remain a member of their organization for as long as you are, in fact, polite and courteous. You may say whatever you like, and call anyone an idiot, including myself, in a personal message, or anywhere outside this forum, but if you actively participate in an organization such as a forum, and wish to remain a part of that organization, you should follow the rules set forth by them. Oh and please don’t yell at me because somebody has already said this, or for some other reason, I already told you I skipped a few pages that didn’t seem to pertain to the argument.
Now on to what I really wanted to talk about. I just want to pose a few questions for you Philosophicus. First off I’d like to state that I thoroughly disagree with you. Now, if every object and every event exists only through perception of the mind, what keeps consistency in the universe? For arguments sake, I will hold your assertions to be true and state that when I leave my house for a vacation, that house no longer exists, along with all my possessions. Now, Philosophicus, why are my possessions still there when I return? Why is it that when I return from my vacation, my house is still exists? The only argument I can see you returning with is: The mind conceives these objects, and when you return, these objects are once again set up by your mind. This idea is a fallacy. To be saying that is to be advocating that you are the center of the universe. To that you may reply: We are each the center of our own universe. At this point I will ask you, Philosophicus. If every person is the center of their own universe, how do people consistently keep harmony and balance in the world? How is it possible for people to communicate with one another when everything is a matter of the individual’s perception? Because people are able to communicate with each other, and are seeing the same universe, it is not possible or plausible that the universe is created out of ones mind. How can it be, that everyone in the world happens to be creating the same universe? The only explanation that I can see to this question would be to assert the belief of God into the equation. I personally do not believe in God as a controlling factor of our society, merely because of the state of the world today (to clear up any misconceptions, I DO believe in a God). Also, Philosophicus, I read in a previous post of yours something about you not believing in god, correct me please if I am wrong in this I intend to offend no one.
So now we have come to a very complicated and muddy mess because there are some major gaps in your argument, Philosophicus. Or at least I believe there to be. I assert that there IS in fact a physical and consistent world, if not only because of the arguments I have stated. I’m positive I could find more to discuss on my points if I were to think more on the subject. If you wouldn’t mind, Philosophicus, refuting my points, I think it’d make for an interesting discussion. Also, if I made any incorrect assumptions, please feel free to correct me, as long as you don’t call me an idiot. I really found this forum just as a place to discuss viewpoints, not on the ethics of internet/organizational rights.
Just about every single philosopher has asserted and has attempted to prove that God exists. Many of their arguments would not hold true in the event that God did not exist. I personally think that because of the society that most of them lived in the idea of God was firmly implanted in their minds. Unfortunately, they could not stop the nature of their minds, which was to question everything, including God. Therefore they each tried to prove in some way or another that God existed. Not every philosopher believed in God but many, especially from older times, did. Another factor is to realize that if they had asserted that God didn’t exist, it is possible that some of these great philosophers may have been executed by the religiously controlled environment that has always, up until recently, been the major deciding factor in all law. But all this is really for another discussion.
Oh and by the way, Berkeley argues that the existence of God is required to explain the diversity and order of our perceptions, and to explain how objects exist when unperceived by me. So Berkeley’s only proof of God is that, because objects exist when I am not around, God exists to keep them in place. So Berkeley’s entire explanation hinges on whether you believe that objects do not exist when you do not perceive them.
Philosophicus’s arguments are very similar in nature to Berkeley’s, almost identical, excepting the fact that he has not provided an explanation for an objects existence when unperceived.
On a side note, I do not know much about philosophers in general, so my knowledge on other philosopher’s views may not be completely correct. For example, my comparison of Philosophicus to Berkeley may not be accurate seeing as I do not have an entirely comprehensive knowledge of Berkeley’s views. Nor do I have an entirely comprehensive knowledge of Philosophicus’s views.
I know what berkeley argues, since he was a bishop he actually invented his theory around god, niot the other way around.
And well I don'T belive most Philosophers used a god, maybe if you say that all supernatural things are godlike things, than I might be able to agree but just as saying philosophers argue there is a god, Bergson who doesn'T comes to my mind.