Comments

  • Quarterly Fundraiser
    Yes, I'll start a thread.
  • Quarterly Fundraiser
    Wow. All great ideas. I asked because I was listening to an NPR article about Facebook's efforts to increase interest. I thought.. "How would the philosophy forum do that?" Really all the stuff you mentioned would be interesting to me. I'd definitely read Dennett's thoughts on his tendency to equivocate. I agree with you though... on the old forum we just ended up abusing people who were good enough to take the time.

    Would you be interested in talking a little more about it? Maybe formulate a plan?
  • Convince the bomb not to explode.
    The universe is the result of God's loneliness.
  • Convince the bomb not to explode.
    It's part of the soundtrack. Plus the Blue Danube if I remember correctly.

  • Convince the bomb not to explode.
    Question, can we talk about this? I can see you're upset. Question, I'd really like to talk about

    this.
  • A child, an adult and God
    Omnibenevolence is a feature of the Abrahamic divinity. Combine that with omnipotence and you have a problem of evil.

    But gods roamed the landscape of the human psyche long before Abraham. Many of them were assholes.
  • On Fascism and Free Speech
    I'm familiar with rightism, yes. But interestingly, the central columns of rightism are not identified in the American Bill of Rights. There was no need to.

    We identify rights when there's a need. I think the 1st Amendment was responding to a situation that doesn't really exist now. If Vagabond is right, that we should recall the value of free speech, I think that means we need to focus on what we're looking to address. Is it a looming Leftist Threat? Obviously not.
  • On Fascism and Free Speech
    So do you think Fascists, Communists, The Left or The Right, Anarchists can tolerate ideologically free speech or don't these groups make the presupposition (Example: Milo's being turned down by Berkeley's due to Marxist or/& Anarchist protesters or Milo being turned down by CPAC ostensibly for moral reasons) that their followers & perhaps by implication that the pubic will be hurt in some manner by any such speech. The assumption that the masses are too immature to handle certain ideological sophistry, that the masses are unable to think as adults.Cavacava

    Do you think the masses are able to think as adults? I think history shows that widespread emotional maturity just... doesn't happen. Embracing democracy means embracing the occasional Oh Shit.

    But isn't freedom of speech really more about the press? I mean.. originally? I'm thinking it's in the First Amendment because British troops confiscated printing equipment that had been used to complain about the British military.

    No, because no one would have anything to say.Cavacava

    Hmm... LOL.
  • The Shoutbox
    It's amazing how many people end up just shooting their faces off. Healthcare workers commonly lament that somebody ought to write an instruction manual.
  • A child, an adult and God
    Evil, by definition, is never justifiable.
  • On Fascism and Free Speech
    What would you say the justification(s) for the right to free speech is(are)?
  • A child, an adult and God
    Evil does not necessitate the nonexistence of god.TheMadFool
    That is correct.
  • Convince the bomb not to explode.
    Dave? What are you doing, Dave?
  • On Fascism and Free Speech
    Maybe the values of free-speech simply need to be re-learned in a new and increasingly connected world who for whatever reason was not able to digitally export them off the bat.VagabondSpectre

    Just to play devil's advocate for a moment.. if there was some governmental means by which all speech could be forced to be truthful, would we still need free speech? I've been pondering the origin of the emphasis on free speech, on the evolution of government, how a governmental form gives way to a different form...
  • Quarterly Fundraiser
    Cool! If you had an opportunity to ask a living philosopher something... what do you think it would be and to whom?
  • Zeno's paradox
    Yet nothing physically infinite happens, and what motion is possible is determined by the laws of physics alone, and not by the necessary truths about an abstraction that bears the same name.

    Common sense dictates that Zeno's mistake was to PRESUME that a certain mathematical notion called "infinity" is physically relevant.
    tom

    Zeno's intentions aside, you aren't solving the paradox by saying this. You're merely restating it. Infinite regresses appear from time to time. Philosophers usually take them as a sign that something's wrong. Consider Frege's and Quine's reactions to the regresses they discovered. No one says, "Oh that's just a fluke of the mind... I'll proceed on as if I never noticed that."

    No. We pay attention to regresses because philosophy is the domain where we're free to take note of such impractical doo-dads.

    If you're planning a trip to the Grand Canyon, feel free to ignore Zeno's Paradox. It has nothing to do with your trip. And by the way, why are you going this time of year? Don't you know the road to the North Rim is probably closed?
  • Zeno's paradox
    But we've already solved the paradox: it is merely a confusion between an abstract attribute and a physical attribute of the same name.tom

    I don't think so. It's just a simple question: does the golfball have to arrive at the center point before it can make it to its destination? Common sense says yes. Infinite regress appears.

    Note that the regress is headed back to the starting point, not the destination.