RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
January 14, 2017 at 6:26 pm
(This post was last modified: January 14, 2017 at 6:32 pm by emjay.)
(January 14, 2017 at 6:21 pm)Khemikal Wrote: If there are no objects to speak of, there is nothing to speak about. Should be a short conversation. The variance of experience is not necessarily a question of the existence of a table (or any object). A blind person does not see a table, does this mean that there is no table?
Forget I said anything. Best to assume there is a table and get down to those sorts of nitty gritties much further down the line
i don't know what I'm saying... just call it a brain fart (January 14, 2017 at 6:25 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Is there a specific proponent of either that you're currently studying?
Well the three philosophers so far discussed are Bertrand Russell, John Locke, and George Berkeley, and roughly it seems locke is direct aligned, Russell is indirect aligned, tending a little towards idealism, and Berkeley is the most idealism aligned but leaning a little towards indirect. That's just how it appears to me on this first pass. Locke is all about primary and secondary properties of objects, and tbh that sounds like a load of bollocks to me... so he's the one I'm most disagreeing with.
