The Brain=Mind Fallacy

[Jackie]

When you say "idea" people are less likely to get married to an "idea" no one should be married to an "idea". Philosophies are something people tend to get married to and worship and much harder to break them out of.

The "idea" of avoiding the word "philosophy" is to reduce dogmatism. People are more willing to question a mere idea. Far too many people have "philosophies" they demand respect for.

[Cato]

[Jackie]

I disagree. Again, to say that one is influenced by ideas IS OK, but when you call them philosophies instead of mere ideas, people can get stuck in dogmatism.

Instead of saying "philosophy" say "I was influenced by this idea".

[Jackalope]

Instead of saying "philosophy" say "I was influenced by this idea".

No.

[Jackie]

Yes. Philosophies come and go and can be held onto regardless of if they are shit or not. People make claims in the form of "ideas" and that is a much less complicated word and does NOT have the dogmatism of "philosophy", thus people are LESS likely to cling to it if it is a mere idea.

[Jackalope]

Yes. Philosophies come and go and can be held onto regardless of if they are shit or not. People make claims in the form of "ideas" and that is a much less complicated word and does NOT have the dogmatism of "philosophy", thus people are LESS likely to cling to it if it is a mere idea.

That's your claim. I don't find your argument convincing. I'm not even convinced you have a good handle on what philosophy is.

[Anomalocaris]

Yes. Philosophies come and go and can be held onto regardless of if they are shit or not. People make claims in the form of "ideas" and that is a much less complicated word and does NOT have the dogmatism of "philosophy", thus people are LESS likely to cling to it if it is a mere idea.

Did you realise import parts of "scientific Method" has also come and gone, so what does the big word "scientific method" mean, exactly?

I am sorry if the proper use of one biggish word seems too challenging to you, but it is within the power of a lot of people, so they might see no reason to change their diction for so feeble a pretender.

[Whateverist]

Yes. Philosophies come and go and can be held onto regardless of if they are shit or not. People make claims in the form of "ideas" and that is a much less complicated word and does NOT have the dogmatism of "philosophy", thus people are LESS likely to cling to it if it is a mere idea.

Let me see if I'm understanding you correctly. IF people who use the word "philosophy" will simply substitute the word "ideas", THEN no one would ever get stuck clinging to dogmatic shitty ideas. What you call a thing is apparently more powerful than I thought. Huh.

The way you are using the word "philosophy" seems closer to "creed". Do people "get stuck" on the latest scientific theories? Or do they just defend them so long as they seem the most elegant explanation of the data available? I would say the latter. The same is true in philosophy. The more elegant explanation wins. The chief difference is that the issues are more subtle and not generally decidable with an experiment.

You really should look into philosophy more if you want to slam it. There is plenty to criticize but you'll never know if you don't look into what it actually is. Don't think science doesn't come in for criticism too. There is an entire branch of philosophy dedicated to just that.

[Neo-Scholastic]

You must be loving this distraction considering the OP isn't about this. You want us to forget your bullshit OP.

Actually I do find it amusing...but also a little sad.

[FallentoReason]

@Brian37

Whether you acknowledge it or not, you most likely have your own philosophy on moral ethics and how you treat others.