Mentioning Phil phD's

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Asher

No, he didn't. Please explain to me why it's useful, nobody has done that yet, although a few have tried...


Is this the kind of stuff they teach you in philosophy? If so, I approve!



I can't believe you did that...

I mean, **** like "multiculturalism" as something invented/discovered by philosophy?

Give me a break! Who do you guys think you're fooling. You've just shown even more reasons why philosophy is a waste of funds at public universities.

This thread needs to be archived.

The most important contemporary thinker regard multicultural pluralism is Will Kymlicka, who happens to be Canadian. The foundations of the notion of multiculturalism can be found as far back as the Stoics. Where do you think the idea of a pluralistic society came from? People didn't used to think this way - someone had to think it up.

Why don't you just admit that you don't know what you are talking about. You look like a silly little boy who's swimming out of his depth, arguing about a subject he knows nothing about.

[Asher]

Why don't you just admit that you don't know what you are talking about. You look like a silly little boy who's swimming out of his depth, arguing about a subject he knows nothing about.

Look -- you just listed a bunch of bull****. I'm sure it all seems quite relevant to you, seeing as you're a philosophy graduate student, but when you start listing off things like "multiculturalism" and "atomic theory" as a product of philosophy, you have to understand why everyone farts in your general direction.

[Boris Godunov]

Ummm, atomic theory is a product of philosophy, Asher. Democritus...

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Asher

Oh my...

Hey, I'm a great philosopher.

I just discovered that when I shove my d1ck into a pencil sharpener, it hurts. I shall call it, the "Law of
Pen15".

Add that to your list.

Just because you can't think of an intelligent response.

I'm sorry Asher, it should be plain to the other posters that you are terminally ignorant regarding this subject and well out of your depth - hence your silly retorts. You simply don't have any decent reply to contribute, so you resort to childishness. I'm guessing you learned this from someone like Rush Limbaugh. All this bluster and gutter wit doesn't impress anyone who knows anything. You know nothing of philosophy, and you admit that you have never done any work in it apart from formal logic (which is not representative of the whole tradition), yet you presume to lecture everyone about how bad and useless it is.

And you commit the chief sin of failing to respond to arguments that are put to you - my guess is because you can't.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Asher

Oh my...

Hey, I'm a great philosopher.

I just discovered that when I shove my d1ck into a pencil sharpener, it hurts. I shall call it, the "Law of
Pen15".

Add that to your list.

ACK!

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Asher
I just discovered that when I shove my d1ck into a pencil sharpener, it hurts. I shall call it, the "Law of
Pen15".

Your d1ck fits into a pencil sharpener? Excuse me, but this problem has more to do with medicine than with philosophy.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Agathon


Just because you can't think of an intelligent response.

I'm sorry Asher, it should be plain to the other posters that you are terminally ignorant regarding this subject and well out of your depth - hence your silly retorts. You simply don't have any decent reply to contribute, so you resort to childishness. I'm guessing you learned this from someone like Rush Limbaugh. All this bluster and gutter wit doesn't impress anyone who knows anything. You know nothing of philosophy, and you admit that you have never done any work in it apart from formal logic (which is not representative of the whole tradition), yet you presume to lecture everyone about how bad and useless it is.

And you commit the chief sin of failing to respond to arguments that are put to you - my guess is because you can't.

And yet, you are the one who resorted to name calling....

ACK!

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Ummm, atomic theory is a product of philosophy, Asher. Democritus...

See, what a twit you are being Asher. You know nothing about this, so you would best be quiet.

I can give you the original Greek texts reporting Democritus' atomic theory if you like.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Tuberski


And yet, you are the one who resorted to name calling....

ACK!

Why don't you read the rest of the thread. It's simply true that he's ignorant of the facts and yet chooses to lecture myself and others, despite being almost completely bereft of knowledge of the topic. That would wear a saint's patience thin.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Agathon


See, what a twit you are being Asher. You know nothing about this, so you would best be quiet.

I can give you the original Greek texts reporting Democritus' atomic theory if you like.

BUT, does atomic theory have anything to do with philosophy?

Did this guy have another vocation?



ACK!

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Tuberski


BUT, does atomic theory have anything to do with philosophy?

Did this guy have another vocation?

No. He was a pre-socratic philosopher and he invented atomism as a way of solving certain problems posed by earlier thinkers. The Epicureans picked it up and carried it along and a version of it eventually became scientific orthodoxy.

I'm not trolling here. There is a good case to be made for philosophers having thought up everything I listed. Contemporary philosophers have somewhat less of an impact but they still have a large influence - witness Wittgenstein or the linguistic turn in philosophy last century.

Asher just doesn't know what he's talking about so he's resorted to being silly.

[loinburger]

I've gotten along well with all of my philosophy professors. We've rarely seen eye to eye, but that's life.

I've gotten along well with a miniscule fraction of the philosophy students I've met. Most of them seem to believe that a good argument consists of blindly questioning/contradicting what the other person says. E.g.,
Stud: "Do you exist?"
Me: "Yes."
Stud: "Ah, but how do you know that you exist?"
Me: "Because if I didn't exist then this conversation would be pretty pointless."
Stud: "Ah, but how do you know that it would be pointless?"
Me: "A conversation requires a minimum of two participants, so if I didn't exist then you'd be having a conversation with yourself. Hence, this conversation would be pointless."
Stud: "Ah, but how do you know that I'd be having a conversation with myself?"
Me: "We're the only two people here right now, so if I don't exist, then you'd be the only person here, hence you'd be alone."
Stud: "Ah, but how do you know that we're the only two people here?"
Me: "Excuse me, but is there a point to all of this?"
Stud: "Ah, but why do you assume that there has to be a point to all of this?"
Me: "You're a ****wit."

There's a purpose to philosophy, I certainly won't deny that. However, there's often not a purpose to taking a philosophy course, since they're full of cretins.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by loinburger
I've gotten along well with all of my philosophy professors. We've rarely seen eye to eye, but that's life.

I've gotten along well with a miniscule fraction of the philosophy students I've met. Most of them seem to believe that a good argument consists of blindly questioning/contradicting what the other person says. E.g.,
Stud: "Do you exist?"
Me: "Yes."
Stud: "Ah, but how do you know that you exist?"
Me: "Because if I didn't exist then this conversation would be pretty pointless."
Stud: "Ah, but how do you know that it would be pointless?"
Me: "A conversation requires a minimum of two participants, so if I didn't exist then you'd be having a conversation with yourself. Hence, this conversation would be pointless."
Stud: "Ah, but how do you know that I'd be having a conversation with myself?"
Me: "We're the only two people here right now, so if I don't exist, then you'd be the only person here, hence you'd be alone."
Stud: "Ah, but how do you know that we're the only two people here?"
Me: "Excuse me, but is there a point to all of this?"
Stud: "Ah, but why do you assume that there has to be a point to all of this?"
Me: "You're a ****wit."

Ah, but am I a ****wit or a ****wit?

ACK!

[Agathon]

Originally posted by loinburger
I've gotten along well with all of my philosophy professors. We've rarely seen eye to eye, but that's life.

I've gotten along well with a miniscule fraction of the philosophy students I've met. Most of them seem to believe that a good argument consists of blindly questioning/contradicting what the other person says. E.g.,
Stud: "Do you exist?"
Me: "Yes."
Stud: "Ah, but how do you know that you exist?"
Me: "Because if I didn't exist then this conversation would be pretty pointless."
Stud: "Ah, but how do you know that it would be pointless?"
Me: "A conversation requires a minimum of two participants, so if I didn't exist then you'd be having a conversation with yourself. Hence, this conversation would be pointless."
Stud: "Ah, but how do you know that I'd be having a conversation with myself?"
Me: "We're the only two people here right now, so if I don't exist, then you'd be the only person here, hence you'd be alone."
Stud: "Ah, but how do you know that we're the only two people here?"
Me: "Excuse me, but is there a point to all of this?"
Stud: "Ah, but why do you assume that there has to be a point to all of this?"
Me: "You're a ****wit."

There's a purpose to philosophy, I certainly won't deny that. However, there's often not a purpose to taking a philosophy course, since they're full of cretins.

Very funny. Mere contradiction is bad philosophy - one should always attack the opponents premises not his conclusion.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Ummm, atomic theory is a product of philosophy, Asher. Democritus...

No kidding.

And you commit the chief sin of failing to respond to arguments that are put to you - my guess is because you can't.

You've yet to actually illustrate philosophy being useful. You've listed off a bunch of bull**** that equate to either observations of society or ridiculous things like "multiculturalism" as the product of society.