• NKBJ
    894
    real intellectuals,whollyrolling

    You don't think philosophers are "real intellectuals"?
  • whollyrolling
    229


    I think that "real intellect" is independent from the subjective nonsense that "philosophers" tend to haplessly toss into their pedantic sermons.
  • NKBJ
    894


    Wow. Well, if you have such a nasty opinion of philosophy and philosophers, I have no clue what you're doing here.

    I do know that it means you are biased in such a way as to make it unsavory for me to further converse with you.
  • whollyrolling
    229


    I just told you that "real intellect" is an exercise in unbiased thought, and you retort that I'm biased and therefore unworthy. My comments have nothing to do with my opinion of a person or their character and everything to do with the integrity of their ideas. If someone is making claims based on emotion or personal experience, then they're not using intellect. How is that a "nasty opinion"?
  • NKBJ
    894


    I stand by my conviction that you're just biased and not worth talking to--possibly just trolling this forum.
  • whollyrolling
    229


    You haven't yet provided a reasonable foundation for claiming that I'm biased. My suggestion that unbiased dialogue is intellectual and biased dialogue is emotional: how is this biased? Also, it's fickle to cry "troll" whenever you don't agree with or understand something.
  • NKBJ
    894
    Also, it's fickle to cry "troll" whenever you don't agree with or understand something.whollyrolling

    It's a sign of bias to constantly tell other people they don't understand things when they simply don't like your attitude.
  • whollyrolling
    229


    Attitude and soundness of reason are not interchangeable, neither is bias interchangeable with either of them. Which is it, do you think I'm biased, or do you think I have a poor attitude, or do you think my commentary lacks soundness of reason?

    I don't constantly tell people they don't understand things, that's just blatantly false. Not everyone dislikes my attitude, also false. Bias is not interchangeable with criticism neither does telling people they don't understand something equate to bias.

    My implication that you don't understand what I'm saying isn't based on bias but on the lack of quality of your responses and the lack of comprehension they exhibit. It's a rational conclusion based on the information available to me.
1234Next
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.