Philosophy Now Forum

In response to Wyman:

But you said earlier that your definition of 'abstraction' was:

By abstract means to speak in general terms rather than specifically

It didn't have to do with extra-sensory phenomena. See how being precise and utilizing definitions can keep a discussion focused and meaningful, rather than shifting mid-discussion?[/quote]

I say otherwise because the apples that we see have all of the facts present while our memories have less of the facts present (being precise relates to having more/most of the facts present that makes it specific).

PhilX

Guys, why waste time on someone who is a blatant retard? That will never understand very basic answers, he can only parrot things, and when he attempts to say something intelligent it utterly fails, just look at this quote!

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Can we touch memory? Can we see it? Hear it? Taste it? Smell it? This is why I regard memory as an abstraction.

HexHammer wrote:Guys, why waste time on someone who is a blatant retard? That will never understand very basic answers, he can only parrot things, and when he attempts to say something intelligent it utterly fails, just look at this quote!

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Can we touch memory? Can we see it? Hear it? Taste it? Smell it? This is why I regard memory as an abstraction.

Well look who's talking. One who couldn't tell a blatant retard if he was looking at one in the mirror.

(btw did you get that spellchecker yet?)

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

HexHammer wrote:Guys, why waste time on someone who is a blatant retard? That will never understand very basic answers, he can only parrot things, and when he attempts to say something intelligent it utterly fails, just look at this quote!

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Can we touch memory? Can we see it? Hear it? Taste it? Smell it? This is why I regard memory as an abstraction.

Well look who's talking. One who couldn't tell a blatant retard if he was looking at one in the mirror.

(btw did you get that spellchecker yet?)

PhilX

Excatly how am I a retard?

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Can we touch memory? Can we see it? Hear it? Taste it? Smell it? This is why I regard memory as an abstraction.

PhilX

Generally this depends if you are a representationalist or a realist. Such a explanation would require a fair bit of time.

This might be a starting point http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_an ... ct_realism

HexHammer said with my response:

"PhilX[/quote]Excatly how am I a retard?[/quote]

Excatly (exactly). Or a troll which is still a retard. Take your pick."

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:HexHammer said with my response:

"PhilX

Excatly how am I a retard?[/quote]

Excatly (exactly). Or a troll which is still a retard. Take your pick."[/quote]You clearly don't comprehend the difference mr Retard of Retards!

Ginkgo wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Can we touch memory? Can we see it? Hear it? Taste it? Smell it? This is why I regard memory as an abstraction.

PhilX

Generally this depends if you are a representationalist or a realist. Such a explanation would require a fair bit of time.

This might be a starting point http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_an ... ct_realism

Can't you see the questions he ask are totally retarded? He doesn't comprehend very basic logic, so why do you waste time on him?

Ginkgo wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Can we touch memory? Can we see it? Hear it? Taste it? Smell it? This is why I regard memory as an abstraction.

PhilX

Generally this depends if you are a representationalist or a realist. Such a explanation would require a fair bit of time.

This might be a starting point http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_an ... ct_realism

It's a good article.

I'm not familiar with all the terminology. I recognize legitimate views however it's termed. I do have my ways at looking at things and I will ask probing questions. And I presume this is a forum to learn from.

PhilX

HexHammer wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:HexHammer said with my response:

"PhilX

Excatly how am I a retard?

Excatly (exactly). Or a troll which is still a retard. Take your pick."[/quote]You clearly don't comprehend the difference mr Retard of Retards![/quote]

So now you call me Mr Retard of Retards. All you're doing is flapping your lips with NO intelligence coming forth. What a waste.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:So now you call me Mr Retard of Retards. All you're doing is flapping your lips with NO intelligence coming forth. What a waste.

I'll take a bit more serious when you can do proper quotation.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:I'm not familiar with all the terminology. I recognize legitimate views however it's termed. I do have my ways at looking at things and I will ask probing questions.

I haven't really been following this, but I dip in occasionally for a laugh. As I remember the issue was a disagreement about what abstract means. Bit of a waste of time challenging definitions; accept them or don't and translate into a word that better fits what people tell you.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:And I presume this is a forum to learn from.

It has that potential, but no one has learnt anything useful in a slanging match with Mr Hammer.

uwot wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:I'm not familiar with all the terminology. I recognize legitimate views however it's termed. I do have my ways at looking at things and I will ask probing questions.

I haven't really been following this, but I dip in occasionally for a laugh. As I remember the issue was a disagreement about what abstract means. Bit of a waste of time challenging definitions; accept them or don't and translate into a word that better fits what people tell you.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:And I presume this is a forum to learn from.

It has that potential, but no one has learnt anything useful in a slanging match with Mr Hammer.

Are you suggesting Hex has nothing useful to offer at all since all he does is start slanging matches on my threads?

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Are you suggesting Hex has nothing useful to offer at all since all he does is start slanging matches on my threads?

Yours and everyone else's PhilX. He did once post something that wasn't 'Babel and nonsens!' or 'Retard!', but I'm not sure he ever followed it up.

HexHammer wrote:

Ginkgo wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Can we touch memory? Can we see it? Hear it? Taste it? Smell it? This is why I regard memory as an abstraction.

PhilX

Generally this depends if you are a representationalist or a realist. Such a explanation would require a fair bit of time.

This might be a starting point http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_an ... ct_realism

Can't you see the questions he ask are totally retarded? He doesn't comprehend very basic logic, so why do you waste time on him?

Because he doesn't strike me as being -what Arising so accurately describes as- a "Gnu".