Search:

Type: Posts; User: Marie Louise von Preussen; Keyword(s):

Search: Search took 0.06 seconds.

  1. Re: Dawkins is an utter failure as a philosopher! (and he smells)

    The problem here is ontological. In fact, the fact that Dawkins focuses so much on metaphysical subjects could be very much why Newton also focused most of his work on metaphysical subjects: it's...
  2. Re: Dawkins is an utter failure as a philosopher! (and he smells)

    Yes, Dawkins is a physicalist. That's true. That doesn't make him escape semantics, also true. Ultimately, I believe Heidegger and Kant to be far superior to Dawkins when it comes to delineating the...
  3. Re: Dawkins is an utter failure as a philosopher! (and he smells)

    I find it very curious, then, that you can have an objective (ergo, pertaining to objects) research without it, ya know, having the QUALITY of pertaining to objects. Can you explain me better? Are...
  4. Re: Dawkins is an utter failure as a philosopher! (and he smells)

    Quality does not exist in objective models, yet objectiveness is a quality. If an objective model fails to account for its own objectivity, it is missing a crucial aspect of reality.

    It is not...
  5. Re: Dawkins is an utter failure as a philosopher! (and he smells)

    Qualia do not exist in post-Cartesian philosophy, and yes they do vary with opinions. Now if you honestly argue that qualia does not exist then I honestly suggest you to taste lemons, apples, and...
  6. Re: Dawkins is an utter failure as a philosopher! (and he smells)

    Then, you should honestly grasp Dawkins' OBJECTIVE experiments (eg, his biological work, his meme theory, etc...) without trusting Dawkins the metaphysician, because his claims about reality being in...
  7. Re: Dawkins is an utter failure as a philosopher! (and he smells)

    I mean this is so frankly obvious to someone acquainted with postmodernism that I felt no need to proceed. Ok, let's us proceed? Heidegger claims, as per Levinas, Sartre, etc... that metaphysics...
  8. Replies
    223
    Views
    4,620

    Re: Richard Dawkins says:

    I think this is rubbish. And as a Muslim, I know better :whistling.

    "I love rationality, I hate religion" - fallacious duality.
    "I love rationality" - given that rationality (aql) is faulty,...
  9. Re: Dawkins is an utter failure as a philosopher! (and he smells)

    Dawkins himself should read Heidegger. Dawkins is a metaphysician, in the sense that he makes foundational and essential claims such as the one gently provided by the user above. It makes me wonder!...
  10. Re: Doesn't Russell's Teapot Refute Itself?

    Analogy... Analogy! That's the issue. Every inference is based on analogies. All that you see of the microcosm, is a direct image of the macrocosm. The same can be said for God. God MUST be posited,...
  11. Re: Doesn't Russell's Teapot Refute Itself?

    Every inference not directly drawn or traceable to sense experience employs analogies from said sense experience. This is an epistemological fact. Russell's teapot is just a logical aporia. Logical...
  12. Re: Doesn't Russell's Teapot Refute Itself?

    Russell's teapot is the classical case of a purely formal aporia being projected into existence merely out of the mind's own whims. There is no such thing, that is, in reality - as opposed to the...
Results 1 to 12 of 12