At 3/25/2012 1:28:55 PM, 000ike wrote:
We must not forget that knowledge is a TOOL to the greater object, which is truth. In having a philosophical discussion with individuals that are not well-versed in the terminology and elaborate jargon of a certain philosophy, it is neither an argument nor a refutation of anything to claim ignorance to the opponent, and thus refuse to argue. Philosophy is grounded in logic and reason, and where an individual has the logical faculties to understand it, his opinions on the matter have worth.
There are people here that take their knowledge of a certain field and use it as intellectual bravado to demean and repress. However, knowedge is meaningless if it isn't both used and shared. Philosophy applies to all individuals of the world on matters of what the world is and how it should be run, yet the irony is that those who call themselves novice philosophers use this state as a sort of exclusive and superior group.
Thoughts?
It seems like someone who is unwilling to argue would know (or
should know) that they are not giving an argument or refutation. An expression of impatience with ignorance and/or an unwillingness to argue shouldn't be viewed as an honest attempt at argument or refutation by either person involved. It should be viewed as an expression of impatience with ignorance and/or an unwillingness to argue. And what's wrong with that? There's quite a bit of arguing which goes on here. Why, in the face of it, is it unacceptable to do what you have described? For instance, I use this site for fun. It's a chore to argue about things I don't feel like arguing about. And I don't like chores.
None of us owe any of us anything- including arguments and/or refutation.
Is the anti-ought ike implying we
should refute arguments even when we don't feel like it for the sake of philosophy? ;)
YYW for prez
At 5/1/2013 11:15:33 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
Crinack is the wall between our understanding and our intuition, it is the wild virtue lost in stifling, rigid forms of communication. It is the wall on which every poet beats, sometimes for an entire lifetime, in the hopes of opening one small crack. Crinack is not a poem. It is the poem.
