(July 14, 2013 at 5:47 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: Frankly, my dear whateverist, I don't. Because gov't isn't "an entity". It is made up of human beings, who are not logically and morally consistent. This is why we have checks and balances.

Nor do I. Whenever some nut-job like this posts these kinds of crap threads I can't help but feel thankful to be who I am instead of him. Is that weird?

(July 14, 2013 at 5:52 pm)whateverist Wrote:

(July 14, 2013 at 5:47 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: Frankly, my dear whateverist, I don't. Because gov't isn't "an entity". It is made up of human beings, who are not logically and morally consistent. This is why we have checks and balances.

Nor do I. Whenever some nut-job like this posts these kinds of crap threads I can't help but feel thankful to be who I am instead of him. Is that weird?

Not at all. I'm thankful you're you too.

(July 14, 2013 at 5:51 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: Yes. It is mental wanking, nothing more. And no, philosophies being subjective make nothing absolute. Where do you get your half-baked ideas - your last acid trip?

Well you are making an absolute statement- saying that philosophy is absolutely subjective.

I can't circle that square. Am I supposed to listen to your actions or your words?

Please specify how one or the other contradicts?

(July 14, 2013 at 5:55 pm)Koolay Wrote: I can't circle that square.

because your a moron

Quote: Am I supposed to listen to your actions or your words?

Your supposed to fuck off and annoy some other people on some other forum. You are either a troll. Or a 15 year old kid in a posh house who just found out about this wonderfull thing called liberterianism, which he has to talk about all the time whilest living on your parents check.

Either way, you are an annoying and useless twat.

(July 14, 2013 at 5:56 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: Please specify how one or the other contradicts?

Because you fail your own test of logic. If you say absolute philosophy is incorrect, you are defining philosophy with your own absolute definition. Thus, you agree, whether you like it or not, that philosophy is absolute.

If you said, 'philosophy could be subjective' you could hold that position logically. But if you say it is correct or incorrect, then the subjectivity goes out the window.

If I say "word's don't have any meaning" then clearly I am completely contradicting myself. If I say "word's could have/do have meaning" then that would be logically sound, since I am not contradicting the statement.

Do you understand?

I said that no philosophy was absolute. I didn't say all were incorrect. No one philosophy satisfies all conditions of life for every one, as philosophy is an ultimately subjective way of looking at the world.

Logic is a good servant but a bad master. Remember that.

---

PS - you might learn how to use words yourself, since you constantly replace ours with your own.

(July 14, 2013 at 6:07 pm)Koolay Wrote: Because you fail your own test of logic. If you say absolute philosophy is incorrect, you are defining philosophy with your own absolute definition. Thus, you agree, whether you like it or not, that philosophy is absolute.

If you said, 'philosophy could be subjective' you could hold that position logically. But if you say it is correct or incorrect, then the subjectivity goes out the window.

If I say "word's don't have any meaning" then clearly I am completely contradicting myself. If I say "word's could have/do have meaning" then that would be logically sound, since I am not contradicting the statement.

Do you understand?

Explaining this to the 15 year old.

Philosophy is a term which covers alot of different schools dedicated to this form of humanistic siences. Just like the term medicin covers various different schools of medicin.

From the various schools of philosophy almoust every single one proposes different procederes to gain knowlege (if gaining knowlege is the goal of that school (epistomology)). I myself am an advocate of Karl Popper and his Critical Rationalism and theory of society, which is a philosophy that proposes the abolishment of all absolutes and replaces the striving for sociatial perfection with the constant reevaluation and thought over a situation.

You asshat probably dont even know what I am talking about, and you will probably ignore this post as always, especialy know that I have shoved your stinking ignorance and lack of knowlege back into your (probably) ugly face!

He's either a child, a troll, or mentally challenged...and I'm willing to entertain the notion of combinations of the three.

He's got some language that's masturbatory, so I don't think he's mentally challenged, but he's definitely confrontational in a childish way. I go with 1 and 2.