Actual Infinities

[I_am_not_mafia]

Spoken like a true dogmatist - lots of handwaving, zero substance. I agree with CW that before you dismiss the concepts herein discussed, including the various projects of philosophers, or try to formulate an argument against them, you should learn about them first. "Philosophy is largely obsolete since the rise of science" gives away your astounding ignorance.

As Rebecca Goldstein argues:

What's wrong with this story? Well, for starters it's internally incoherent. You can't argue for science making philosophy obsolete without indulging in philosophical arguments.

https://edge.org/response-detail/25423

Zero substance? Maybe you need to actually read my posts.

I made some solid arguments. Chadwooters did not respond to any of them except to tell me to look up nominism.

So basically he said that what he was arguing was valid because it had a branch of philosophy named specifically for it.

He did not argue his case. He did not try to refute mine. His response was like an argument from authority mixed with argument ad populum. Basically his argument is that lots of educated people who can use long complicated words that they made up disagree with me. I don't know what you would call it. An Argument ad Erudite Wank?

There's a joke that the only use for a philosophy degree is to make you philosophical enough to work at McDonalds. There's a reason that's true.