Total Posts:54|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Who is your favorite philosopher?

belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 9:31:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
lol why is this in the religion section?

as for philosophers, in no particular order, i enjoy:

david hume
aristotle
daniel dennett
ayn rand
bertrand russell
thomas nagel

and more, but these are my favorites at the moment.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 9:35:46 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I'm not gonna bother.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 9:39:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/5/2010 9:33:48 PM, wjmelements wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

that reminds me.... Locke is pretty amazing...
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 9:53:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
1. Ludwig von Mises
2. Murray Rothbard
3. King Solomon
4. Paul Emile de Puydt
5. Gustave de Molinari

I'd probably like Nozick.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 9:54:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/5/2010 9:39:53 PM, belle wrote:
that reminds me.... Locke is pretty amazing...

If you buy into social contract.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 9:56:30 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Zhuangzi

and Hume
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 2:03:16 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 2/5/2010 9:21:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm not sure whether mine is Murray Rothbard or Friedrich Nietzsche.

I also like Ayn Rand.


All atheists should love Descartes.
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 2:09:07 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/6/2010 2:03:16 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/5/2010 9:21:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm not sure whether mine is Murray Rothbard or Friedrich Nietzsche.

I also like Ayn Rand.


All atheists should love Descartes.

No.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 3:24:59 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
1. Alan Watts

2. Martin Heidegger

3. Jiddu Krishnamurti

4. Baruch Spinoza

5. Friedrich Nietzsche
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 3:54:49 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/6/2010 2:03:16 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/5/2010 9:21:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm not sure whether mine is Murray Rothbard or Friedrich Nietzsche.

I also like Ayn Rand.


All atheists should love Descartes.

who "Proved" God through the fact that we could conceive of such a thing??

I like Descartes, but I don't see why Atheists necessarily should
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:03:25 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/5/2010 9:21:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm not sure whether mine is Murray Rothbard or Friedrich Nietzsche.

I also like Ayn Rand.

Colossians 2:8 (New International Version)

See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.
The Cross.. the Cross.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:08:02 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/6/2010 4:03:25 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.

So basically: Don't be reasonable.

yep that one passage sure explains a lot.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:15:46 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 2/6/2010 3:54:49 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 2/6/2010 2:03:16 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/5/2010 9:21:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm not sure whether mine is Murray Rothbard or Friedrich Nietzsche.

I also like Ayn Rand.


All atheists should love Descartes.

who "Proved" God through the fact that we could conceive of such a thing??

I like Descartes, but I don't see why Atheists necessarily should


'I think therefore I am.' Based on solipsism that the only thing which exists is your own mind. Atheists could trail that easily, a theist couldn't. But yeah why should atheists specifically like Descartes?
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:17:32 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/6/2010 4:15:46 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/6/2010 3:54:49 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 2/6/2010 2:03:16 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/5/2010 9:21:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm not sure whether mine is Murray Rothbard or Friedrich Nietzsche.

I also like Ayn Rand.


All atheists should love Descartes.

: : who "Proved" God through the fact that we could conceive of such a thing??

I like Descartes, but I don't see why Atheists necessarily should


'I think therefore I am.' Based on solipsism that the only thing which exists is your own mind. Atheists could trail that easily, a theist couldn't. But yeah why should atheists specifically like Descartes?
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:21:11 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 2/6/2010 4:17:32 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 2/6/2010 4:15:46 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/6/2010 3:54:49 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 2/6/2010 2:03:16 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/5/2010 9:21:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm not sure whether mine is Murray Rothbard or Friedrich Nietzsche.

I also like Ayn Rand.


All atheists should love Descartes.

: : who "Proved" God through the fact that we could conceive of such a thing??

I like Descartes, but I don't see why Atheists necessarily should


'I think therefore I am.' Based on solipsism that the only thing which exists is your own mind. Atheists could trail that easily, a theist couldn't. But yeah why should atheists specifically like Descartes?


I am not understanding that statment. Because we can conceive God does not mean God exists. Concepts exist, all of them do, but the idea that the concept puts out might not. Such as the concept of evolution, that exists, I can conceive it and understand it, does not mean it really happened.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:26:51 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/6/2010 2:03:16 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/5/2010 9:21:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm not sure whether mine is Murray Rothbard or Friedrich Nietzsche.

I also like Ayn Rand.


All atheists should love Descartes.

Dear nonGod that's fail.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:30:06 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/6/2010 4:08:02 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 2/6/2010 4:03:25 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.

So basically: Don't be reasonable.

yep that one passage sure explains a lot.

No, don't be decieved.. don't always look for the 'hidden' meaning, don't always read 'between the lines'.. be a child again and SEE.
The Cross.. the Cross.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:31:47 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/6/2010 4:21:11 AM, GodSands wrote:

I am not understanding that statment. Because we can conceive God does not mean God exists.
I agree, Descartes didn't.

He thought that the Idea of God was so beyond anything that we could have possibly thought of through/by experiencing the imperfect stuff that we do.

The Idea of God is Perfection. We, living through imperfect perceptions, and could not possibly come up with such an idea as perfection.

Therefore the only way that Idea can exist in the minds of men, is if at some point God revealed the truth to them directly. Therefore God exists.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:34:18 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/6/2010 4:30:06 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

No, don't be decieved.. don't always look for the 'hidden' meaning, don't always read 'between the lines'.. be a child again and SEE.

That would be a line from my favorite philosopher zhuangzi, who would support being childlike for their lack of clinging to such brittle certainty.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:38:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/6/2010 4:34:18 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 2/6/2010 4:30:06 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

No, don't be decieved.. don't always look for the 'hidden' meaning, don't always read 'between the lines'.. be a child again and SEE.

That would be a line from my favorite philosopher zhuangzi, who would support being childlike for their lack of clinging to such brittle certainty.

And would "see" in that they embrace that reality that presents itself, without claiming that it's absolute.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:41:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 2/6/2010 4:31:47 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 2/6/2010 4:21:11 AM, GodSands wrote:

I am not understanding that statment. Because we can conceive God does not mean God exists.
I agree, Descartes didn't.

He thought that the Idea of God was so beyond anything that we could have possibly thought of through/by experiencing the imperfect stuff that we do.

The Idea of God is Perfection. We, living through imperfect perceptions, and could not possibly come up with such an idea as perfection.

Therefore the only way that Idea can exist in the minds of men, is if at some point God revealed the truth to them directly. Therefore God exists.


I believe that God exists, and my argument of good and evil backs my claim of God's existence. God has written on our hearts His existence, and our concsious what God has given us clearly states what good and evil is.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:43:12 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/6/2010 4:41:08 AM, GodSands wrote:
God has written on our hearts His existence, and our concsious what God has given us clearly states what good and evil is.

Contradictory claims say otherwise.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:44:23 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/6/2010 4:41:08 AM, GodSands wrote:

I believe that God exists, and my argument of good and evil backs my claim of God's existence. God has written on our hearts His existence, and our concsious what God has given us clearly states what good and evil is.

So you're saying you know god through examining your own/ other people's hearts.

That is you know god through human nature...

So this explains why you say if you believed in Evolution you would necessarily disbelieve in God (despite the two not being, strictly speaking, mutually exclusive)

Am I right?
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:47:35 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/6/2010 4:44:23 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 2/6/2010 4:41:08 AM, GodSands wrote:

I believe that God exists, and my argument of good and evil backs my claim of God's existence. God has written on our hearts His existence, and our concsious what God has given us clearly states what good and evil is.

This is pretty much why I used to believe in God, I thought this was the most reasonable evidence.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 5:04:06 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 2/6/2010 4:44:23 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 2/6/2010 4:41:08 AM, GodSands wrote:

I believe that God exists, and my argument of good and evil backs my claim of God's existence. God has written on our hearts His existence, and our concsious what God has given us clearly states what good and evil is.

So you're saying you know god through examining your own/ other people's hearts.

That is you know god through human nature...

So this explains why you say if you believed in Evolution you would necessarily disbelieve in God (despite the two not being, strictly speaking, mutually exclusive)

Am I right?


The Bible I believe is the Word of God. That comes first. Then the Bible says God has written His existence on the hearts of man, thats why we get all kinds of gods, tribal gods etc... Then you have the ten commandments, what is good and what is evil. The argument of good and evil, what is good and evil and where do they come from or who decides what is good and evil?

By reasoning with men, their God given conscious will be enlighted, understanding what they have done against God, Christ becomes the most important thing the the world to them. Confession and repentence becomes an easy task to them, all done by the Holy Spirit.