Philosophy Now Forum

thephilosopher wrote:

Impenitent wrote:top player...

dreidel dreidel dreidel...

-Imp

I love your reply! What is your favorite genre of game?

that depends on the cards I am dealt

-Imp

thephilosopher wrote: I've spent many hours searching myself for answers. Now I search not just myself but others as well. .

Why are you still searching, what answers are you still looking?

thephilosopher wrote:The puzzle is, what will be one of the puzzles in the game? .

How to find the answer that will solve all the puzzles in the game, is one of the puzzles in the game.

thephilosopher wrote:Another challenge is to tell me what the game is (I can help confirm what the game is)..

The game of Life, is the game.

thephilosopher wrote: There is more than one everything

.

How is there more than one everything?

thephilosopher wrote:But all that said, we know nothing until we know everything.

So, are you admitting here that you know nothing? Or do you know everything?

thephilosopher wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

thephilosopher wrote:Isn't that overconfidence instead of arrogance? Or delusional instead of arrogant? I would say arrogance means I would belittle the other players, but they are all valuable, and I'm happy they are there. Are games also delusions by definition?

If you prefer me to call you delusional then so be it.

I prefer you'd call me whoever you believe I am. But that avoids the question: are games delusions by definition?

I don't do belief. If you prefer to be known as delusional then, as the label fits that's what I'll call you, since you seem happy with it.
And no games are not delusion, and certainly not by definition, unless a game is played as if it were not a game.
You are confusing cases here; not much of a 'top' player.

Impenitent wrote:top player...

dreidel dreidel dreidel...

-Imp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnzVq2t7bi4

thephilosopher wrote:1. I envision myself as a top player and want an easy way to distribute my work for the benefit of people in general rather than people in specific.

In other words, attempting conversation with you is probably going to be a disaster from my perspective, because you see yourself as superior and you want to play the role of teacher. I have no interest in that, and in fact I rather dislike it. What I'm looking for is friendly, casual conversation with people who see each other as intellectual equals, with a focus on philosophy (on this board, at least), because we're all interested in philosophy or we're all "philosophy fans" and we enjoy doing philosophy.

Here's a quick two-question test, though, to see if there's a possibility that I might consider you to be qualified to act as a teacher:

(1) What is your view of epistemological coherentism with respect to whether it's circular?

(2) What would you say the role of causality is in genidentity?