Every philosophy is essentially an idealism ...

Every philosophy is essentially an idealism ... the opposition of idealistic and realistic philosophy has no significance. A philosophy which ascribed veritable, ultimate, absolute being to finite existence as such, would not deserve the name of philosophy

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Meanwhile Kit Fine in analyticland:

    I’m firmly of the opinion that real progress in philosophy can only come from taking common sense seriously. A departure from common sense is usually an indication that a mistake has been made.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >A philosophy which ascribed veritable, ultimate, absolute being to finite existence as such, would not deserve the name of philosophy

    ... in which there is no daylight between a Marx & a Heidegger. The Alethic does not abide availing itself to such kinds.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >in which there is no daylight between a Marx & a Heidegger
      ?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >... in which there is no daylight between a Marx & a Heidegger.
      thats all he had to say dontcha know

      https://i.imgur.com/hEx4dqn.jpeg

      >in which there is no daylight between a Marx & a Heidegger
      ?

      you post that picture like someone else, somewhere else, didn't just make an argument rooted in actuality

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Hegelian sperginess reminds me of star wars fans

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >frick actual reality, make up your own instead
    based

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      and truthpilled

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Don't you think that the person who is likely to succeed in this attempt most perfectly is the one who approaches each object, as far as possible with the unaided intellect, without taking account of any sense of sight in his thinking, or dragging any other sense into his reckoning - the man who pursues the truth by applying his pure and unadulterated thought to the pure and unadulterated object,
      cutting himself off as much as possible from his eyes and ears and virtually all the rest of his body, as an impediment which by its presence prevents the soul from attaining to truth and clear thinking? Is not this the person, Simmias, who will reach the goal of reality if anyone can?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I see no reason to think that you can approach an object any way except through your senses.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >I see no reason
          that's a (you) problem

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I'd love to learn remote viewing, got a tutorial?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Here you go: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/hl/hlconten.htm

            Start with sheet, indeterminate being—no presuppositions allowed. Work your way up.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        How do I arrive at the proposition that cats exist without using my senses at all?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          he's not talking about empirical judgments dummy

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            What knowledge of any kind can be gained without sense data?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            synthetic a priori knowledge

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Nta, but in Plato's Phaedo, which he's quoting from, the examples given immediately beforehand are the Just, the Beautiful, the Good, Bigness, Health, Strength, which understood in themselves won't admit of sense-perception. Now, whether you'd agree with that (and I'm myself somewhat skeptical that, at least as far as Beauty, Bigness, Health, and Strength are concerned, they can be understood wholly apart from sense), is a different matter, though there's something to the notion that while, say, Beauty can be "seen" in a body or painting, or "heard" in a piece of music, what, if anything, would unify those two experiences of Beauty couldn't seem to be found in a thing you can point to, especially if you locate that experience in the mind. But that's not to wave away difficulties with doing away with sense entirely, or maybe Plato would qualify it (as I think he in fact does later in the Phaedo) that you start with sense-informed opinions about what's Beautiful, but that knowledge of Beauty itself would have to differ from the nascent experiences, that the knowledge, in order to be knowledge, couldn't just rest on judgement of particulars.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >you start with sense-informed opinions about what's Beautiful, but that knowledge of Beauty itself would have to differ from the nascent experiences, that the knowledge, in order to be knowledge, couldn't just rest on judgement of particulars.
            Yes, I think that's his view. I'm not committing to the view that all knowledge is exhausted by observation, or the material, for example I think that mathematical Platonism is somewhat plausible. Maybe numbers really do exist as abstract objects, beyond just their physical representation and beyond just quantities of objects (so there is a number 3, not just 3 apples, 3 cats etc. (which would be nominalism)).
            I just think that, first of all, we would probably never arrive at that abstract knowledge if we could not first observe quantities of concrete objects and, secondly, that abstract knowledge doesn't exhaust all knowledge. The empirical observation that there are cats (or maybe even just cat-shaped collections of atoms) is also a kind of knowledge. I even think it's possible that there are other minds, that might be able to generate more abstract knowledge from pure thought, but it just doesn't seem to be how the human mind works.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >One should not forget that philosophy is the art of masking inner torments.
    BTFO’d by Cioran

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, but just don't forget that Cynicism is one of its techniques.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Skepticism**

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No it's not

  7. 3 weeks ago
    ⽕ I V S E I ⽕

    Philosophy is as realistic & scientific as one's speculum is clean.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *