Philosophy

[Sputnick]

Interesting. Naturally I would think postmodernism and deconstruction would lead me towards an ignostic approach as well. But after reading a couple books by a professor named Merold Westphal, I changed my outlook quitea bit.



Personally, I'm more into Eastern philosophy. Siddhartha Gautama, Guru Nanak, Confucious, and Lao Tzu, just to name a few.



Eastern Philosophers provide a good sense of balance to us Westerners which help illuminate areas in our own worldview that we may have previously accepted without any question due to our own cultural conditioning.

Postmodernism and deconstruction didn't lead me entirely to ignosticism. But to try and explain you would be like trying to explain a blind man what's light. (No, I'm not calling you "blind", but it would take some time to explain what lead me partially to Ignoticism)



I don't like Confucious (nor eastern philosophy) because he puts the greatest emphasis on the importance of study.



But yet again, I'm an hypocrite. I can't go any farther without using any kind of concepts.



But lemme ask you something, do you think a senseless person (has no known senses) can obtain any kind of experience/information?

 

[Druiddroid]

Do you think a senseless person (has no known senses) can obtain any kind of experience/information?

no



i don't see a way they could unless they had previous knowledge

 

[Falkor]

if they had absolutely no senses how could they possibly attain experience/information outside of a link to their brain where you could pump them info...but innately how could they ever learn anything with no sense of sight, sound, touch, sensation, anything

 

[Sputnick]

That's a typical answer from a typical empirist ( Empiricism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ).



Just because you don't know or because it's out of your reach it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.



A born-senseless person can probably obtain any kind of information out of our known sensors (senses).



If I was born with 10 different senses, you wouldn't understand my "reality", nor would I probably communicate with you. But that doesn't mean my "reality" doesn't "exist".



And now probably some of you will answer that we are limited by 5 senses, thus making it impossible to obtain information without them. That's another typical answer from a typical empirist.

 

[Best Rogue EU]

fuck this thread is annoying

 

[Sputnick]

fuck this thread is annoying

And so is your comment.



Now get the fuck out of my thread before I blow your mind.

 

[Hamcake]

Just because you don't know or because it's out of your reach it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

strawman

 

[pilgrim]

strawman

Or you know, talking about things he cant. Art imitates life so to speak, similar to how those who knew in the matrix cannot tell those who didn't. He makes sense to me, blind people are able to see in a way quite similar to what I think he is talking about. His variation is just more advanced, if its what I think it is.

 

[danceparty]

make money, fuck bitches.

 

[Druiddroid]

That's a typical answer from a typical empirist ( Empiricism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ).



Just because you don't know or because it's out of your reach it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.



And now probably some of you will answer that we are limited by 5 senses, thus making it impossible to obtain information without them. That's another typical answer from a typical empirist.

we are limited by 5 senses? no, there's lots of senses in the brain



not sure what kind of evidence you are talking about though, like what is out of our reach that you would claim to exist?

strawman

no, he's right, but he has no specific claim so it's worth nothing right now

 

[Painaid]

This sounds like another way of asking the famous question:



If a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound?



Nothing can be assumed to exist beyond our own perceptions. When there is no evidence, we should assume no more and no less.



The problem, however, with answering this question (and yours) is the definition of 'exist'. Existing is simply a human structure within the infinite play of language, so even by asking this question you're already overcommitting yourself and making the same fallacy that you expect your opponent to make.

 

[danceparty]

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 

[Omgatwink]

Absence of Evidence is Evidence of Absence

 

[danceparty]

Absence of Evidence is Evidence of Absence

better have Tresspasser double check that match. i think he forgot to carry a one.

 

[pilgrim]

This sounds like another way of asking the famous question:



If a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound?



Nothing can be assumed to exist beyond our own perceptions. When there is no evidence, we should assume no more and no less.



The problem, however, with answering this question (and yours) is the definition of 'exist'. Existing is simply a human structure within the infinite play of language, so even by asking this question you're already overcommitting yourself and making the same fallacy that you expect your opponent to make.

I can agree, but my argument was that humans have other senses to pick up on things other then the 5 they teach in kindergarten. ESP and gut feelings are an example of this, and there have been several studies expressing some proof of it. Most of them are hampered by involving more people as opposed to fewer. Its kinda dumb to assume most people would have these gifts, considering most americans can barely live with the ones they have. I think it is more likely a rarity and as such those endowed with them are less likely to reveal themselves. Leaving most of what we see to be tricks or scams. That does not mean there is not some truth to it, just that it is buried by those who would profit from it any way they can.

 

[Falkor]

how can you have esp or gut feelings (of which one doesnt exist and the other isnt reliable in any case) if youve lived your whole life w/o any sensory input from the world. youd be a mentally retarded vegetable. youd most likely have bitten your tongue off since you didnt know what its purpose was and couldnt feel your teeth cutting it. you wouldnt even have a voice in your hear because you never learned a language. you couldnt communicate with anyone unless they could tap into your brain and find a way

 

[Druiddroid]

I can agree, but my argument was that humans have other senses to pick up on things other then the 5 they teach in kindergarten. ESP and gut feelings are an example of this, and there have been several studies expressing some proof of it. Most of them are hampered by involving more people as opposed to fewer. Its kinda dumb to assume most people would have these gifts, considering most americans can barely live with the ones they have. I think it is more likely a rarity and as such those endowed with them are less likely to reveal themselves. Leaving most of what we see to be tricks or scams. That does not mean there is not some truth to it, just that it is buried by those who would profit from it any way they can.

gut feelings are just emotions



my economics professer was talking about a guy who was a genius mathematician and made some important economic decisions, but in a freak accident he lost a part of his brain.. while he was still brilliant at math, he could not make any of the difficult decisions he made before because he lost that gut feeling



ESP is silly, you can't just have senses you don't have, that's why they're senses



i don't think your statement that it's a rarity to have ESP has credence

 

[pilgrim]

I was not talking about the man with zero sensory perception, I feel using a blind man is a much more accurate way to describe extra sensory abilities anyway. I agree it sounds as dumb as you described it, but what he was trying to explain still makes sense, just not in that way.



Also the decision making part of your brain is far different then the part regulating emotions. It is not the same thing.

 

[Hamcake]

About the validity of gut feelings: Confirmation bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



There was that blind kid who could "see" by making clicks and having his super tuned hearing to figure out how far away an object was from the time it took the reflected sound wave to reach his ear. This is just a re-interpretation of an existing sense though. I'd like to see some evidence for extra-sensory abilities.

 

[Sputnick]

Strawman, lol. What was the original proposition in the first place? Because I don't see the informal fallacy.



The thing is - I've called myself an hypocrite. If you read some Socrates you may know what I mean, or may not.



It's just that I no longer go along with empiricism, but yet I conclude that with an empiristic point of view, making my conclusion empirical, fallacious, contradictive and based upon something that's uncertain - regarding the concept of conclusion, and furthermore, certainty.



So there you have: me.