Re: How does the philosopher react to artillery shells?
Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2013 9:05 am
Love over comes fear.love can overcome the fear of death for the right cause.as in suicide.you know like kamikasi pilotes in ww2.
For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Probably, maybe not, if I understand you correctly. But you can do that and still embrace a dualistic view of the world.Kuznetzova wrote:(1) Your body is composed of bound molecules. (2) Those bonds can be broken with force.
You would never in your life type these two facts into a philosophy forum. You prefer to introduce skeptical doubt on them by utilizing squirrely language games. When placed in a situation where they would be tested, your behavior would coincide with both the knowledge of and acceptance of these as facts.
Of course there are.Ginkgo wrote:There are no atheists in foxholes when under attack.
As a philosopher and a soldier I'd have been behind the wall on the first explosion and not needed telling. You watch too many films.Kuznetzova wrote:So you have found yourself at Stalingrad when the Nazis are bombing and invading the city. The morning has been mostly quiet, until a large explosion suddenly goes off nearby. The lieutenant in your company grabs your shirt by the collar and yells into your face: "They are hitting us with artillery! GET BEHIND THAT WALL OR YOU WILL BE TORN TO SHREDS!"
Fortunately, you are a philosopher. Your education affords you many options here that are not available to most people. ...
EVERYTHING is composed of molecules, tanks, teacups, water, mud, etc, all with different properties, just saying "Your body is composed of bound molecules" makes no sense at all and are completely unrelateing to your other arguments.Kuznetzova wrote:(1) Your body is composed of bound molecules. (2) Those bonds can be broken with force.
You would never in your life type these two facts into a philosophy forum. You prefer to introduce skeptical doubt on them by utilizing squirrely language games. When placed in a situation where they would be tested, your behavior would coincide with both the knowledge of and acceptance of these as facts.
HexHammer wrote:You ALWAYS use the arguments about molecules, no matter what you say, no matter what the topic. You have no idea what you are saying.
Ok, in very rare occations you don't say anything about molecules, happy now?Kuznetzova wrote:HexHammer wrote:You ALWAYS use the arguments about molecules, no matter what you say, no matter what the topic. You have no idea what you are saying.![]()
My posting history is publicly-available. So anyone can go see that you are not right.