TIMTOWTDI (There is more than one way to do it) BSCINABTE (But sometimes consistency is not a bad ..) — EugeneW

:up: Gracias señorita.

That doesn’t mean I haven’t resorted to the occasional insult or forceful hand myself — Possibility

:naughty:

Wars exist. No use pretending they do not. — I like sushi

You haven't seen (real) war!

Shahryar & Scheherazade (The Arabian Nights)

More like gynophobia than misogyny, but hey, it feels on point.

As it has been noted over the years by many, sometimes when Sherlock Holmes claims to use deduction, it is actually "Induction". You're doing that now Agent — Philosophim

It's not just induction, Sherlock Holmes' method involves all styles of inference, including but not limited to induction i.e. deduction does feature in his modus operandi.

It's no different than saying, "Why do all firefighters hate the color blue?", then giving no examples. You're making broad assumptions about a profession based on...what? Have you asked a statistically significant number of firefighters? Have you asked even one? Are you just assuming they don't like the color blue based on how they act? — Philosophim

Tim Toady Bicarbonate! Nevertheless, points worth noting.
Also note, these are inductive questions, statistical to be precise.

Why don't you ask some philosophers about the good life? What does it mean to them, and is it their primary motivation? Painting people with a broad brush of opinionated water while pretending it is factual colored oil may leave an image in your head that you want, but creates no tangible painting that others can see. — Philosophim

I'm not painting people with any brush or color. I'm calling it as I see it. Like scientists aka natural philosophers, have forgotten philosophy's main purpose (the good life) as evidenced by how they treat ethics as a hindrance, to be removed asap, certain branches of philosophy have completely ignored the (main) quest, the good life. Maybe it's like this story in the Arabian Nights where 3 princes split up and go in different directions, vowing to meet again at the same spot after a year of seeking their own respective fortunes. I hope it is.

bayonet him — FreeEmotion

You can do anything you like with bayonets, except sit on them. — Talleyrand

I agree. I would even say: the objective in philosophers’ mind was not “to discover how to live the good life”, but “to live the good life”. — Angelo Cannata

They (philosophers) aim for the perfect life, it must be known how to live such a life before one can even attempt to live it. Philosophers, in their desire for a flawless life, forget that reality is messy and is gonna throw you the proverbial curve ball, every now and then, that you have no idea how to tackle. It's back to the drawing board then - your weltanschauung needs tweaking or needs to be replaced with a better one. This constant realignment of your worldview should terminate at some point or, if you're like me, can be a never ending story. It's a scientific enterprise if you ask me.

Have you asked philosophers what their opinion of the good life is? It sounds like you think philosophers generally don't have an opinion on this. How do you know the topics they cover are auxiliary to what they consider "the good life"? — Philosophim

Elementary my dear Watson! — Sherlock Holmes

Deduction!

Agent Smith! My man! Exactly! They study the meaning of the roots, how the bark looks in UV light, if a tree can be reduced to parts, if it makes a sound in the wind if we're not there to hear, if the tree has a function, the meaning of the word "tree", our knowledge of trees, the tree as an -ism, the tree as pleasure, the evolution of a tree, the tree in the light of God, etcetera etcetera, without knowing what a tree is. Likewise for a forrest. — EugeneW

:up:

That's a confused post. Determinism is misplaced when talking about freedom in thinking. It's because determinism puts the issue on action, not thinking, or it just ignores that thinking of doing something is not the same as acting on that thought. To determinism, our actions are what we examine. Which is incorrect. — L'éléphant

No idea what you mean?

Let me put it this way: Is there a difference between someone who can't mull over available options and someone who can? Which do you think is (more) determined or, conversely, more free?

There seems to be a clear difference between considering choices and making them.

What would have to be added to digital computation for a computer to be conscious? — RogueAI

:up:

Let me see if I got it.

1. Discrete symmetries have stages in transformation that exhibit noticeable in-between changes e.g. rotating an equilateral triangle.

2. Continuous changes are such that no stage in the transformation can be identified as different e.g. spinning a sphere/circle.

3. Noether symmetries are continuous transformations,the transformations being temporal translations.

4. In GR, there are issues with Noether symmetries.

More or less, yes.

A walk down memory lane...

I recall perception, I have perceived...? Memory read error.

begging not to be deactivated — RogueAI

:chin:

Does any person beg to be...deactivated?

Doesn’t answer the question — Mww

In its own way, it does!

The point of OM is seen only when reflected in a mirror placed at the bottom end of the word, OW!!

:roll:

sentimental — chiknsld

Fool.

is Buddhism "real" — Sapien1

Lemme take a stab at it.

Anatta! Buddhism negates itself - it has no essence that we could grasp, that would persist and in that sense jibes with Wittgenstein's philosophy. Buddhism has no purpose beyond its utility as a tool to understand that plain and simple fact. Just like how language performs seppuku (in Wittgenstein's hands), Buddhism self-destructs! Anicca!

Wittgenstein's mysticism? Hopefully not an undiagnosed brain tumor! :grin:

science — Joshs

Hypotheses are always about coherency. They are never proven true. One selects, according to some predefined criteria, the true best hypothesis.

credentials — TiredThinker

changed — TiredThinker

history — TiredThinker

psychology — TiredThinker

:up:

What's the latest on the JWST? Will it radically transform our understanding of the universe, ourselves?

Well, you tell me. I'm a computer programmer! :smile:
But, don't we have similar conditions in philosophy, appearing as logical schemes? Can they work if statements, arguments and propositions are not stated clearly and correctly? — Alkis Piskas

We have to fill in the gaps, principle of charity; Trolls, a different tale.

I try to be original, but oftentimes I find myself dealing in the currency of cliche nonetheless.:roll: — ucarr

As far as I can tell, there's no point in reinventing the wheel. Nevertheless, there's a premium on innovation.

What exactly is the point of being a philosopher anyway? Science is far more interesting. — chiknsld

Philosophy: forgetting to live while trying to find out how to live? Replace "i" in live with "o" and it still makes sense.

probability — Yohan

great art and music — Yohan

mainstream — Yohan

motivation — Yohan

commitment and seeking — Yohan

feels hypocritical. — Yohan

sufficient — Yohan

rigor — Yohan

accuracy — Yohan

I'm not satisfied — Yohan

:up:

It's clearly not of any real interest to you. Look at the time...tempus fugit!

But it doesn't mon ami. — Daemon

But it does, mon chéri!

Regarding imprecise language, your use of "that" above refers to my entire OP, the last paragraph or some other part? — ucarr

:lol: Good one!

Too many people out there (including myself) here some brief excerpt from a philosopher and think themselves enlightened because ‘we thought/knew that already’. — I like sushi

The Hindus condensed the totality of the universe into one word that even infants, during there babbling, can say, OM! Any idea what OM means? :lol:

The question should've made sense. Your dodging skills are excellent!

noble undertaking — jgill

:lol:

clear and correct descriptions — Alkis Piskas

:smile: What's a small oversight between philosophers, eh? We're not computers that have issues like not understanding IF x > 9 TEHN print "Hello world". Reading isn't a passive activity, is it? :chin:

To be quite frank?

tbqf — Sapien1

?

tbqf i found the video to be mildly funny. — Sapien1

I don't think it was supposed to be funny. If it was a rib-tickler for you, well and good.

No let's not start over: what question am I evading? — Daemon

Never mind, no offense. Please do your own homework. :smile:

Hint: Individuation, AI research.

i don't know what to make of this video — Sapien1

If we have to fight for equality, I mean literally, tooth and nail, all's good!

Let's start over.

For an AI, the locus for the mind is the CPU.

Do you know other minds exist?

You're begging the question and also evading mine.

I am but one woman. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Draw your own conclusions.

Helen was one woman. Trojan war!

Sita was one woman. Indo-Lankan war!

:smile: