The Argument That Philosophy, True Philosophy, Does Not -

[Bill Wiltrack]

.


In it's Core Involve Any Words, Just a Continued Feeling of, I am Here; The Practice of Self-Consciousness



* The words above are a continuation of the title. My supporting argument for my thesis is contained in the following:









.

[mattsidedish]

.


In it's Core Involve Any Words, Just a Continued Feeling of, I am Here; The Practice of Self-Consciousness



* The words above are a continuation of the title. My supporting argument for my thesis is contained in the following:

.

First off, terrible color.

Perhaps I should try immitating your colorful habits of constructing a response in order to get on the same page as you.

You are still avoiding the question of, "What is a 'legitimate' philosopher.



Giving a generalized term, ie. 'I am here,' does not support your assertion of what is and isn't a 'legitimate philosopher.'




You should try using an actual explanation, yes, using words to back up your term.

Otherwise, we are forced to eschew your generalized statements that have no reason or evidence to be asserted.


Gif time.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.




The color was a conscious decision. I wanted to make the invasiveness within the message box as lean as possible.


Ideally I would have been able to have the complete title of this thread to read, - The Argument That Philosophy, True Philosophy, Does Not In it's Core Involve Any Words, Just a Continued Feeling of, I am Here; The Practice of Self-Consciousness - in the uppermost Subject: box.


...and then the this message block below would be completely blank.





The presumption being that the observer of this thread would actually provide the supporting argument for this thesis - if they were able.


If you do not understand the concept and practice of simple self-consciousness then the argument for this thread would not sustain. Thus the possible invalidness of this thread would again be the responsibility of the observer of this thread.





.

[Ginkgo]

.


The presumption being that the observer of this thread would actually provide the supporting argument for this thesis - if they were able.


If you do not understand the concept and practice of simple self-consciousness then the argument for this thread would not sustain. Thus the possible invalidness of this thread would again be the responsibility of the observer of this thread.





.

Bill, this is an argumentum ad consequentiam.

In other words, the truth value of your premise is not related to the premises. Rather, the responsibility for truth value rests on the shoulders of the reader.


Perhaps Uk was correct in his analysis.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.



YES! You are exactly correct.


I was amazed that I could actually conceive a type of thread such as this and then, in addition, be able to express this turn-around of the responsibility and consequence upon the observer and not necessarily upon the original poster.


Thank you for getting this and expressing what, actually, earlier, I wanted to reveal.


...I'm unsure of the other member's analysis of me. Take that upon yourself.





.................................





.

[Arising_uk]

And there you have the gnu in all its glory, if you don't understand me its not me but you. Irrefutable.

[uwot]

And there you have the gnu in all its glory, if you don't understand me its not me but you. Irrefutable.

I blame projection.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.


Yeah,...actually, I stand by that.


It's not up to me to make you understand anything. That's your responsibility.




...you can't stuff understanding down someone's throat.




.

[Arising_uk]

.Yeah,...actually, I stand by that.

It's not up to me to make you understand anything. That's your responsibility.

Untrue, if you've got something that is understandable of course.

...you can't stuff understanding down someone's throat.

True but you can make it edible and leave it up to them to decide whether to eat.

[mattsidedish]

It's not up to me to make you understand anything. That's your responsibility.

You are correct, you can't control what we understand or accept.

HOWEVER, You are required to present evidence/logic/any kind of reasoning/justification sufficient to back up and explain your assertions.

If you don't present any evidence or justification of logic to back up or justify agreeing with your point, then it isn't worth our consideration. No matter how much you claim that it's not your responsibility, IT IS. If you are comfortable asserting opinions on us without giving ANY sort of reason to believe it other than, "That's the way it is," perhaps you should do it elsewhere.

Remember being a "legitimate philosopher" and having a "worthwhile opinion?" Well, in my humble opinion, I believe that in order to be a "worthwhile assertion maker," with a "worthwhile opinion," you should give more than "that's the way it is" as justification to rationalize your opinion.

I'm not a mod or anything (and I don't claim any authority) but I feel very safe making this point, having held a few mod positions over the years.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.





...not sure of your age but I had an experience, a deep philosophical experience, when I was quite young.



And now here I am.

I was convinced back then, and I still believe today, that philosophy is a young mans game.

Philosophy, true philosophy is born in a young mans mind... or spirit.


Deep, deep pain and anguish brought me to a point back then when all meant nothing.

I developed an intuition. I couldn’t trust what I had known as my self.


An amazing time as I look back on it.



Consciousness. Self-consciousness. Nothing else matters.







..............................



.

[mattsidedish]

I don't care about your life story. Philosophy is not bound by age. It is not bound by experience, and is not limited to a certain type of person. Again, you are creating your own requirements and definitions.

My age is not important, but if you like, you can always look at the introduction forum where I explain this.

If you are trying to insinuate that because of my age, my point is invalid, or that you are no longer required to answer the question that I ask, then so be it.

Don't be this type of person.

Now, back to the topic, please.

Read my post above and try again. You've managed (again) to completely avoid the question.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.




No...no my post above is meant for the member prior to you.


I wasn't addressing your post. Yours kind-of slipped-in on me.


I'm not concerned about you or your life story.



PRO TIP – If you want someone to answer your questions don't act like an asshole.


PRO TIP * - SENIOR LEVEL – Don't try to intimidate anyone on this board. It won't work. People answer the questions they wish to. That's just the way it is. Again, and I can't stress this enough, try not to act like an asshole.




.

[Arising_uk]

No...no my post above is meant for the member prior to you.

Then why did you give him exactly the same reply in your other thread?

I wasn't addressing your post. Yours kind-of slipped-in on me.

Twice!? And how did you miss the bit where when you post the system says something like, "Another post has been made to this thread do you wish to continue?"

I'm not concerned about you or your life story.

He and I said nothing about our life-stories, you did.

PRO TIP – If you want someone to answer your questions don't act like an asshole.

Oh come on! He fairly responded his feelings to your life story, i.e. who cares, answer the questions asked of you.

PRO TIP * - SENIOR LEVEL – Don't try to intimidate anyone on this board. It won't work. People answer the questions they wish to. That's just the way it is. Again, and I can't stress this enough, try not to act like an asshole.[/size]

"Intimidate"? What because he hurt your feelings by saying he didn't care about your back-story.

Just saw your post to Rick, talk about acting like a delusional arsehole.

[Arising_uk]

Apparently this was meant for me. So,

...not sure of your age but I had an experience, a deep philosophical experience, when I was quite young.

53.

You've already told me this, it was what? Sitting in a classroom and feeling one with all and then losing one's sense of self.

And now here I am.

And?

I was convinced back then, and I still believe today, that philosophy is a young mans game.

So much for Socrates, et al.

Philosophy, true philosophy is born in a young mans mind... or spirit.[/b

So whats an old fool like you doing trying to recreate it?

Deep, deep pain and anguish brought me to a point back then when all meant nothing.

I hope you've addressed it by now.

I developed an intuition. I couldn’t trust what I had known as my self.

Blimey! Life must have been tough since then I guess.

An amazing time as I look back on it.

Is that why you keep searching for it again?

Consciousness. Self-consciousness. Nothing else matters. [/size]

Nothing else matters to me. - FTFY.