Hey everyone check out the new site. Don't get mad for my posting this here I am a lowly worm I know. http://z3.invisionfree.com/Action_Re...ex.php?act=idx
I'll do a wiki on that so many books already so little time! So one of my new favorite philosophers is Diogenes of Sinope
Sorry, i havnt been on for a long time i'll try and put some time into this..
What do people here think of objectivism?
Break it down for us.
drum roll please...
"One's philosophy is not best expressed in words ; it is expressed in the choices one makes ... and the choices we make are ultimately our responsibility." E. Roosevelt Just stumbled upon this. By the way, here comes your 30th member ...
Philosophy of life.
good group icon.
Am I right or wrong? http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...46#post5977846
That's why we divide decisions between a senate/house of nobles and a house of representatives/house of commons - to get the benefits of utilitarianism hopefully without the negative effects, like if 51% decide it's best to kill all the Jews or something. Ingenuity ftw.
Wait, forgot to reference the utilitarian discussion started on the first page.
utilitarianiam, although very attractive as a whole, is a largely inapplicable ethic, for regardless of how we try to dress it, it is impossible for us to gage an outcome of any given moral situation using such a consequentialist ethic. Logically, we can reason that as predicting consequences or the future for that matter is impossible (of course, unless you believe otherwise, or you have some form of nostradamus like ability), we are led to the conclusion that to use experience from both past and present is most fitting when adressing moral dillemas. Although not religiously minded, i think Situation Ethics to be more convincing- what would you guys have to say on the likes of Fletcher
Oh yeh, forgot to mention, the philosopher with the most attractive argument i've come across so far in my albeit short 9 months studying philosophy is George Berkeley. 'to be, is to be percieved.' What do you guys have to say in response to such a statement
I think it's real. In fact you did not appear until I perceived this little avatar posting in a group I had long forgot about.
An interesting piece of solipsistic reasoning, however, this raises a rather odd problem. When we recognise an-other we grant it existence, but in so doing we demonstrate an-other that brought us into existence, yet can it be plausible that this chain of cause-effect can produce otherness so full of content both spontaneously and instantly. If you asked me to sketch out a fictitious person I would take some time, yet when I perceive I make little to no conscious effort to construct. I seem to have no control over this process. Either my perception is a predetermined simulation or it is a set of tools designed to reveal the real. Either way I am powerless in the face of my perceptions.
There is no meaning to life if there is I would love to know it.
