Who is your most detested philosopher ?

[Nostromo]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
I think that's the reason why he says the "so called" laws of nature...

I understood what he meant, but I'm afraid that what he had to say about laws of nature isn't very interesting, not anymore at least.

I believe most philosophers today believe that laws of nature exist, but they don't agree on what they are and why the hell Nature obeys those laws. The seventeenth century scientist Robert Boyle, for example, believed that it was God who made Nature obey them.

There are some antirealists like van Fraassen who don't believe they exist. But its a minority view.

But all this just confirms your point: there are a number of philosophical assumptions underlying science and science policy as well.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Impaler[WrG]
Far from it, my position is Religion surpressed reason (which ofcourse already existed) and when that supression was reduced (it hasn't stopped completly) reason one again florished. People used reason to then invent a lot of stuff (Industrialization) and think up far more interesting reasons to kill each other (Ideology) and our wars are now for other reasons often very bad reason, but they are less frequent, shorter, less destructive (comparativly) and less barberous.

The Holocaust exterminated eleven million people systematically, like vermin. The communists in Romania under Ceaucescu (sp?) imprisoned and tortured clergymen like the late Fr. George Calciu for years to get them to renounce their faith. Stalin forced phony confessions out of people then had them killed for confessing to a crime, because they were "class enemies." The Khmer Rouge...where do I start with the Khmer Rouge? What exactly makes these less barbaric than, say, the Spanish Inquisition? And how less frequent, seeing as they all happened within a time frame of less than a century, and they're only a couple of examples?

To be fair, I should mention my own country's sins as well. How about saturation-bombing Cambodia to get at Vietnam? All discussed in a very civilized German accent in the White House. That was much more rational, as is waterboarding in Guantanamo and "extraordinary rendition" courtesy of Egypt. The ethics of Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are up for debate, I suppose (what constitutes a military target?), but there's no denying a whole lot of innocent people died in a very unpleasant manner. Oh, that reminds me, the entire Cold War. A big, civilized game of chicken with nuclear weapons that could have killed billions at any time. Just what are you smoking that makes you think we're better now than we were then?

Final thought: Estimates vary so wildly on civilian casualties in Iraq that they're of no use, but we've ruined a million lives at the least and we still don't know why.