Philosophy Now Forum

uwot wrote:

HexHammer wrote:Then please enlighten me.
If you can't explain it, then there's something wrong.

I don't doubt it, Mr Hammer.

I made a reasonable request, or should I see it as a fancy thing you tryed to make you look smart? ..and you can't back it up?

HexHammer wrote:I made a reasonable request,

So you did.

HexHammer wrote:Thinking is partially psychology, and what has math to do with psychology?

I don't know.

HexHammer wrote:or should I see it as a fancy thing you tryed to make you look smart? ..and you can't back it up?

Be my guest.

HexHammer wrote:

uwot wrote:

HexHammer wrote:Then please enlighten me.
If you can't explain it, then there's something wrong.

I don't doubt it, Mr Hammer.

I made a reasonable request, or should I see it as a fancy thing you tryed to make you look smart? ..and you can't back it up?

Hex I've asked you to provide substance to your arguments about a dozen times, and not got anywhere, I hardly think you are in any position to chastise someone for doing exactly what you always do when challenged on your inane rants?

Blaggard wrote:Hex I've asked you to provide substance to your arguments about a dozen times, and not got anywhere, I hardly think you are in any position to chastise someone for doing exactly what you always do when challenged on your inane rants?

Are you comparing my inane rants to Mr Hammer's? A pox on you, sir.

uwot wrote:

Blaggard wrote:Hex I've asked you to provide substance to your arguments about a dozen times, and not got anywhere, I hardly think you are in any position to chastise someone for doing exactly what you always do when challenged on your inane rants?

Are you comparing my inane rants to Mr Hammer's? A pox on you, sir.

No I think Hex is by far the superior inane ranter on this forum.

Blaggard wrote:No I think Hex is by far the superior inane ranter on this forum.

Always the bridesmaid.

uwot wrote:

Blaggard wrote:Hex I've asked you to provide substance to your arguments about a dozen times, and not got anywhere, I hardly think you are in any position to chastise someone for doing exactly what you always do when challenged on your inane rants?

Are you comparing my inane rants to Mr Hammer's? A pox on you, sir.

Blagg is a mentally ill stalker, he spew blatant lies all the time.

- here I made a long well reasoned analysis of Star Trek - prime directive: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=12574#p161897

Unfortunaly I don't consider it philosophy, as it's only spelling out what was already spelled out, for an unappreciative person, who don't comprhend anything of it, nor care about.
A sports commentator who spells out what the sports people are doing, isn't doing sports by commentating, nor is spelling out very simple things, so that children and cozy chatters can understand it, philosophy, it's casting pearls before swine.

- here I reason why I won't give 'prof' excessive help, unlike many other cozy chatters:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12475&start=15#p160375

I do reason when I see that it may have a chance to improve people or the situation, else the same mistake won't happen twice.
These are simple things that Blagg doesn't understand, nor ever will and for an eternity will stalk me and spew lies and deciet about me.

HexHammer wrote:

uwot wrote:

Blaggard wrote:Hex I've asked you to provide substance to your arguments about a dozen times, and not got anywhere, I hardly think you are in any position to chastise someone for doing exactly what you always do when challenged on your inane rants?

Are you comparing my inane rants to Mr Hammer's? A pox on you, sir.

Blagg is a mentally ill stalker, he spew blatant lies all the time.

- here I made a long well reasoned analysis of Star Trek - prime directive: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=12574#p161897

Unfortunaly I don't consider it philosophy, as it's only spelling out what was already spelled out, for an unappreciative person, who don't comprhend anything of it, nor care about.
A sports commentator who spells out what the sports people are doing, isn't doing sports by commentating, nor is spelling out very simple things, so that children and cozy chatters can understand it, philosophy, it's casting pearls before swine.

- here I reason why I won't give 'prof' excessive help, unlike many other cozy chatters:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12475&start=15#p160375

I do reason when I see that it may have a chance to improve people or the situation, else the same mistake won't happen twice.

You imagine yourself as way more important to anyone than you really are Hex.

These are simple things that Blagg doesn't understand, nor ever will and for an eternity will stalk me and spew lies and deciet about me.

Yeah one or two threads where you bothered to explain your ranting, hardly makes up for the hundreds where you just insult the poster and then refuse to discuss the subject.

Clearly Hex is mildly psychopathic as he seems to conflate imaginary superiority and now has imagined some psychosis which is possibly and most likely just projection; Hex quite clearly has no social skill or empathy and seems to have some serious antisocial personality issues aka psychopathy. One wanders how you grow up without actually developing any sort of social skill or elan, but then this sort of prognosis is common in people who have APD, I am sure Hex would make a fascinating case study on ADHD and NPD and/or psychopathy (APD).

Both are genetic, although psychopathy is congenital.

HexHammer wrote:

tbieter wrote:I follow Professor James V. Schall who contends that a university that does not teach Plato is not a true university.

I would argue that one should read Plato and Aristotle continually during one's lifetime.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dperA9b3Re0

Uhmm, Plato did have some good points, but I don't see the relevance of wasting much time on him.

In general it seems philosophy likes to waste time on outdated philosophers.

Alfred North Whitehead was a mathematician and philosopher. Here is his assessment of the significance of Plato's thought:
"According to Alfred North Whitehead, "The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato" (Process and Reality, p. 39, Free Press, 1979).

That may have been an exaggeration, but it is true that Plato (together with his mentor, Socrates, and his pupil, Aristotle) introduced the world to the way of thinking we call philosophy (which comes from a Greek root meaning "love of wisdom"
http://www.platofootnote.org/

tbieter wrote:

HexHammer wrote:Uhmm, Plato did have some good points, but I don't see the relevance of wasting much time on him.

In general it seems philosophy likes to waste time on outdated philosophers.

Alfred North Whitehead was a mathematician and philosopher. Here is his assessment of the significance of Plato's thought:
"According to Alfred North Whitehead, "The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato" (Process and Reality, p. 39, Free Press, 1979).

That may have been an exaggeration, but it is true that Plato (together with his mentor, Socrates, and his pupil, Aristotle) introduced the world to the way of thinking we call philosophy (which comes from a Greek root meaning "love of wisdom"
http://www.platofootnote.org/

Yes? ..and much of it are outdated.

HexHammer wrote:Yes? ..and much of it are outdated.

Mr Hammer, I don't think you understand philosophy all that well. It is not a set of answers that are right or wrong; it is about understanding ideas and developing the critical skills to challenge them. You clearly don't value that, but do you think it is outdated?

uwot wrote:

HexHammer wrote:Yes? ..and much of it are outdated.

Mr Hammer, I don't think you understand philosophy all that well. It is not a set of answers that are right or wrong; it is about understanding ideas and developing the critical skills to challenge them. You clearly don't value that, but do you think it is outdated?

That sounds very nice, could you elaborate on that? Where in the real world do they use such thing?

I've never heard about any big buisness hire a philosopher.

HexHammer wrote:That sounds very nice, could you elaborate on that? Where in the real world do they use such thing?

Law, politics, IT, journalism, the civil service, the secret services, pretty much anywhere where analysis, critical thought and literacy is required.

I've never heard about any big buisness hire a philosopher.

Obviously not as Philosophy as a subject is not of much interest to a field where such things as ethical behaviour is considered to be passé. As is obvious to all(although for some reason you keep wishing to point it out?) philosophy is out of favour in a world that thinks science has all the answers and yet it still keeps hanging in there, why? Because philosophically science cannot answer 'why' questions and despite what philosophy has said people still keep wishing answers to such things, maybe they ought to read some and solve this issue. Interestingly enough it appears that Religion is back on the rise with respect to Existentialism, go figure. I blame a lack of philosophical study and science not understanding or rising to their philosophical role but then again maybe thats just the UK as other Europeon countries do seem to still have a philosophical aspect to their studies.

No idea why you spend so much time upon a philosophy site when you consider it a useless subject? Surely you should be upon business sites giving them the benefit of your insights, such as they are.

HexHammer wrote:That sounds very nice, could you elaborate on that? Where in the real world do they use such thing?

Occasionally on this forum; rarely in your part of Denmark.

HexHammer wrote:I've never heard about any big buisness hire a philosopher.

Does it follow that therefore they don't?

Arising_uk wrote:

HexHammer wrote:That sounds very nice, could you elaborate on that? Where in the real world do they use such thing?

Law, politics, IT, journalism, the civil service, the secret services, pretty much anywhere where analysis, critical thought and literacy is required.

I've never heard about any big buisness hire a philosopher.

Obviously not as Philosophy as a subject is not of much interest to a field where such things as ethical behaviour is considered to be passé. As is obvious to all(although for some reason you keep wishing to point it out?) philosophy is out of favour in a world that thinks science has all the answers and yet it still keeps hanging in there, why? Because philosophically science cannot answer 'why' questions and despite what philosophy has said people still keep wishing answers to such things, maybe they ought to read some and solve this issue. Interestingly enough it appears that Religion is back on the rise with respect to Existentialism, go figure. I blame a lack of philosophical study and science not understanding or rising to their philosophical role but then again maybe thats just the UK as other Europeon countries do seem to still have a philosophical aspect to their studies.

No idea why you spend so much time upon a philosophy site when you consider it a useless subject? Surely you should be upon business sites given them the benefit of your insights, such as they are.

You're trying to reason with a psychopath it's like trying to convince a chair that it is a trombone.

I've never heard about any big buisness hire a philosopher.

Yeah people with the ability to think about other things than their own personal self agrandizement and their bank balance are not valued in the average company, if people started talking about the ethics of things how would those without a moral compass ever get more money?