• celebritydiscodave
    76
    Once one starts dictating what constitutes logic one is moving away from rather than towards that which constitutes being logical. That which is logical, first to be considered as being logical,, cannot exist as a state of detached thinking in its own right, it has to be shared by a majority of the population. There is no such thing as independent of perception logic. That which is may fall outside of perception, and then it can demand for more than mere logic to take you there. One can argue logic, prove one`s communication skills, and their ability to borrow and steal other`s thoughts,but none of this is philosophy, either one has good instinct for both producing and recognizing that which is or one does not, it`s that simple. Brief is always best in philosophy, not in those other areas, but most definitely in philosophy, it is an instinct. Arguments and counter arguments have no place here because they have no end.. Without this instinct and beyond the mental exercise so called philosophy is a total waste of effort, arguments being infinite. The obstacle is big brains, big egos, and big mortgages, but with no natural instinct, and also of course the whole institution around philosophy.
  • Uneducated Pleb
    38
    This is just wrong and I wish people would stop saying it.MindForged
    But it fits so well with so many, ummm, "theories".
  • MindForged
    547
    Once one starts dictating what constitutes logic one is moving away from rather than towards that which constitutes being logical. That which is logical, first to be considered as being logical,, cannot exist as a state of detached thinking in its own right, it has to be shared by a majority of the population. There is no such thing as independent of perception logic. That which is may fall outside of perception, and then it can demand for more than mere logic to take you there. One can argue logic, prove one`s communication skills, and their ability to borrow and steal other`s thoughts,but none of this is philosophy, either one has good instinct for both producing and recognizing that which is or one does not, it`s that simple. Brief is always best in philosophy, not in those other areas, but most definitely in philosophy, it is an instinct. Arguments and counter arguments have no place here because they have no end.. Without this instinct and beyond the mental exercise so called philosophy is a total waste of effort, arguments being infinite. The obstacle is big brains, big egos, and big mortgages, but with no natural instinct, and also of course the whole institution around philosophy.


    I swear you sound like a computer generated message.
  • celebritydiscodave
    76
    Those furthest from the instinct tend to the longest argument, because the argument is the very next best thing. Those with least natural ability require a degree,.such that their denial can never again see the light of day..
12Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.