Total Posts:36|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

How much of a philosopher are you?

Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 10:33:21 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
1 -- I know pretty much nothing about "philosophy." My discussions on ethics, politics, or religion all appeal to common sense and have no basis in anything deeper.

2 -- I've read around a bit, and can discuss basic philosophical concepts.

3 -- I'm either a student of philosophy, or very well-read. I can hold arguments with real philosophers and come up with thoughts and concepts that aren't in the basic literature.

4 -- I'm a professional philosopher, and have written theses and argued extensively with others. I can justify my beliefs and ideals to those who are educated in them as well.

5 -- I am a master among philosophers. I have pioneered the study and every word that I write is treated with reverence by the intellectual community.

I'm definitely a 2.
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:04:17 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I think a better scale would be: to what extent are you curious about the nature of existence and to what lengths do you go to satifiy that curiosity?
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 6:32:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 11:04:17 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
I think a better scale would be: to what extent are you curious about the nature of existence and to what lengths do you go to satifiy that curiosity?

Not really. I'm talking about education here.
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 8:23:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I am an enlightened all-knowing being that can see directly into the very essence of reality.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:27:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 10:33:21 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
1 -- I know pretty much nothing about "philosophy." My discussions on ethics, politics, or religion all appeal to common sense and have no basis in anything deeper.

2 -- I've read around a bit, and can discuss basic philosophical concepts.

3 -- I'm either a student of philosophy, or very well-read. I can hold arguments with real philosophers and come up with thoughts and concepts that aren't in the basic literature.

4 -- I'm a professional philosopher, and have written theses and argued extensively with others. I can justify my beliefs and ideals to those who are educated in them as well.

5 -- I am a master among philosophers. I have pioneered the study and every word that I write is treated with reverence by the intellectual community.


I'm definitely a 2.

I think I'm maybe a 1.5, or something like that.
Tsar of DDO
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:29:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Whoa whoa whoa. Cody and YYW both here claiming that they're barely able to think around things in a meaningful sense? Isn't Cody a student of philosophy?
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:34:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 11:29:49 PM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
Whoa whoa whoa. Cody and YYW both here claiming that they're barely able to think around things in a meaningful sense? Isn't Cody a student of philosophy?

No. I won't speak for anyone other than myself, but I dabble in philosophy. That's it. And when I think of a 6, I'm thinking of someone like Michel Foucault, Habermas (although he would be more like a 5), Heidegger, Wittgenstein, Kant, Russell, Dworkin, etc. (to broadly survey those who I think have the right to qualify).
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:35:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I also think that when I say "basic" and when you say "basic" we are talking about two different things.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:37:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Perhaps to put this both more and less clearly; you see a body of water in the fog as you look from the beach. You know that the body of water is both a body of water, and presumably deep but you can't see the end of it or below the surface... only what's immediately there. I've been swimming.
Tsar of DDO
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:37:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 11:29:49 PM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
Whoa whoa whoa. Cody and YYW both here claiming that they're barely able to think around things in a meaningful sense? Isn't Cody a student of philosophy?

Members of this site have a very biased sample of me, which is why I get kind of embarrassed when people (e.g., S_Hawkins) rave about how smart they think I am. I only speak on the subjects on which I'm well-read (relative, anyway, to things with which I have no or negligible familiarity). There is an astounding wealth of literature out there on an unfathomable quantity of topics and areas of expertise, of which I have only a shallow view of a very narrow sliver. I would be useless, for instance, in a conversation about Philosophy of Mathematics. I'm not well-read in PhilMind, Philosophy of Religion, Scholasticism, etc. I have views concerning Philosophy of Language, but I know basically none of the technical jargon or leading figures, etc. I might be a decent political or ethical thinker, but, holistically, I'm nothing to write home about.
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:40:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 11:37:55 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 9/28/2013 11:29:49 PM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
Whoa whoa whoa. Cody and YYW both here claiming that they're barely able to think around things in a meaningful sense? Isn't Cody a student of philosophy?

Members of this site have a very biased sample of me, which is why I get kind of embarrassed when people (e.g., S_Hawkins) rave about how smart they think I am. I only speak on the subjects on which I'm well-read (relative, anyway, to things with which I have no or negligible familiarity). There is an astounding wealth of literature out there on an unfathomable quantity of topics and areas of expertise, of which I have only a shallow view of a very narrow sliver. I would be useless, for instance, in a conversation about Philosophy of Mathematics. I'm not well-read in PhilMind, Philosophy of Religion, Scholasticism, etc. I have views concerning Philosophy of Language, but I know basically none of the technical jargon or leading figures, etc. I might be a decent political or ethical thinker, but, holistically, I'm nothing to write home about.

Cody, you actually are pretty sharp. But your perspective of what constitutes noteworthiness is a bit different from most -given, I think, that you're still within the halls of the academy. Being evaluated from a perspective outside the academy is quite different.
Tsar of DDO
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 12:03:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
In all fairness, there is a certain sense, though it's arrogant for me to suggest, in which I'm on my way to excelling philosophically, and this consists in what I described recently to Ike, namely that conception of philosophy according to which it is not so much an autonomous discipline as a approach to thought, or, rather, a way of life which is both inseparable from and co-constitutive with life itself.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 9:46:16 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 11:37:55 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 9/28/2013 11:29:49 PM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
Whoa whoa whoa. Cody and YYW both here claiming that they're barely able to think around things in a meaningful sense? Isn't Cody a student of philosophy?

Members of this site have a very biased sample of me, which is why I get kind of embarrassed when people (e.g., S_Hawkins) rave about how smart they think I am. I only speak on the subjects on which I'm well-read (relative, anyway, to things with which I have no or negligible familiarity). There is an astounding wealth of literature out there on an unfathomable quantity of topics and areas of expertise, of which I have only a shallow view of a very narrow sliver. I would be useless, for instance, in a conversation about Philosophy of Mathematics. I'm not well-read in PhilMind, Philosophy of Religion, Scholasticism, etc. I have views concerning Philosophy of Language, but I know basically none of the technical jargon or leading figures, etc. I might be a decent political or ethical thinker, but, holistically, I'm nothing to write home about.

Considering that there are people who speak on matters in which they are well-read and still aren't very convincing or particularly forceful, I think you should accept the that perception. It isn't just the content of what you're writing, but the manner in which you write it - sometimes, actually all the time, I find it hard to believe that you're 21.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 9:49:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 12:03:12 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
In all fairness, there is a certain sense, though it's arrogant for me to suggest, in which I'm on my way to excelling philosophically, and this consists in what I described recently to Ike, namely that conception of philosophy according to which it is not so much an autonomous discipline as a approach to thought, or, rather, a way of life which is both inseparable from and co-constitutive with life itself.

I think you mean either Dylancatlow or Eitan_Zohar. We haven't spoken recently
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 11:38:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 11:26:23 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Probably 1.5-1.75.

If you're 1.5-1.75, I'm in the negative. Don't insult me.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 12:18:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 9:49:58 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/29/2013 12:03:12 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
In all fairness, there is a certain sense, though it's arrogant for me to suggest, in which I'm on my way to excelling philosophically, and this consists in what I described recently to Ike, namely that conception of philosophy according to which it is not so much an autonomous discipline as a approach to thought, or, rather, a way of life which is both inseparable from and co-constitutive with life itself.

I think you mean either Dylancatlow or Eitan_Zohar. We haven't spoken recently

I actually mean LordKnukle.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 1:52:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 12:18:11 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 9/29/2013 9:49:58 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/29/2013 12:03:12 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
In all fairness, there is a certain sense, though it's arrogant for me to suggest, in which I'm on my way to excelling philosophically, and this consists in what I described recently to Ike, namely that conception of philosophy according to which it is not so much an autonomous discipline as a approach to thought, or, rather, a way of life which is both inseparable from and co-constitutive with life itself.

I think you mean either Dylancatlow or Eitan_Zohar. We haven't spoken recently

I actually mean LordKnukle.

I'm insulted that you got us confused :P
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Magic8000
Posts: 975
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 3:23:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'm a 2. Although sometimes I come up with ideas that aren't in basic literature.
404 coherent debate topic not found. Please restart the debate with clear resolution.

"So Magic8000 believes Einstein was a proctologist who was persuaded by the Government and Hitler to fabricate the Theory of Relativity"- GWL-CPA
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 6:24:39 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
2.39474 nac
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 7:30:21 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 12:03:12 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
In all fairness, there is a certain sense, though it's arrogant for me to suggest, in which I'm on my way to excelling philosophically, and this consists in what I described recently to Ike, namely that conception of philosophy according to which it is not so much an autonomous discipline as a approach to thought, or, rather, a way of life which is both inseparable from and co-constitutive with life itself.

This is refreshing to hear. Philosophy is an activity and degrees of success should be measured in terms of utility. The longer I studied, the more I came to realise that the two things to avoid most are becoming part of a philosophical school and indulging in needlessly verbose, jargon-heavy impenetrable Wall O'Text type nonsense. So I became a Wittgensteinian and write very long posts that require huge amounts of clarification.
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 7:44:50 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/30/2013 7:30:21 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
At 9/29/2013 12:03:12 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
In all fairness, there is a certain sense, though it's arrogant for me to suggest, in which I'm on my way to excelling philosophically, and this consists in what I described recently to Ike, namely that conception of philosophy according to which it is not so much an autonomous discipline as a approach to thought, or, rather, a way of life which is both inseparable from and co-constitutive with life itself.

This is refreshing to hear. Philosophy is an activity and degrees of success should be measured in terms of utility.

Wait what

The longer I studied, the more I came to realise that the two things to avoid most are becoming part of a philosophical school and indulging in needlessly verbose, jargon-heavy impenetrable Wall O'Text type nonsense. So I became a Wittgensteinian and write very long posts that require huge amounts of clarification.

Lol
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 8:01:19 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/30/2013 7:44:50 AM, Noumena wrote:
Wait what

I am unclear as to what I'm being waitwutted over.
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 8:58:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/30/2013 8:01:19 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
At 9/30/2013 7:44:50 AM, Noumena wrote:
Wait what

I am unclear as to what I'm being waitwutted over.

Measuring philosophical fulfillment in terms of 'utility'.
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 9:10:19 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
The Fool: This scale is bias against Foolosophers.
<(89)
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 11:34:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/30/2013 8:58:30 AM, Noumena wrote:
Measuring philosophical fulfillment in terms of 'utility'.

Not so much fulfillment as value; if something isn't of use, it isn't of value, philosophically speaking. I think this is a better philosophical metric than that of evidence; logic is useful, but there is nothing (that I'm aware of, at least) that could 'prove' it. It either works - is internally consistent and produces results we can make use of - or it does not. Anything more limited than this seems to me to miss the point of what philosophy is for.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 7:58:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
2.5 ugghh why the heck does ddo consider numbers to be caps
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.