What accounts for the fact that some students are super-devoted and therefore wholesome and some are not?

[Hobbes' Choice]

God is omnipresent; Therefore god is the devil.

[duszek]

God is omnipresent; Therefore god is the devil.

All omnipresent entities are all devil (or devilish).
All God are omnipresent entities.
All God are all devil (or devilish).

Why is the first premise true ?

[Hobbes' Choice]

God is omnipresent; Therefore god is the devil.

All omnipresent entities are all devil (or devilish).
All God are omnipresent entities.
All God are all devil (or devilish).

Why is the first premise true ?

The phrase "all god" is incoherent". "GOD" does not represent a quantity but a Singularity. All implies a multiple.
There is only one omnipresent thing, by definition.

[duszek]

In the Aristotelian logic one of a kind can be considered as all of this particular kind.

The terms in the propositions have to be taken generally (all of a certain kind) or particularly (some of a particular kind).

I am not arguing here with anyone.
I am only offering patterns of logical argument.
No offence if someone is not interested.

[Hobbes' Choice]

In the Aristotelian logic one of a kind can be considered as all of this particular kind.

Rubbish. There is only one omnipotent thing. It's definitional. I don't gree Aristotle said so, and it would not matter if he did as he'd be wrong in this case. You are confusing things with quantities: like have more fewer sugar; or less sugar cubes: when in fact you can only have less sugar and fewer sugar cubes.


The terms in the propositions have to be taken generally (all of a certain kind) or particularly (some of a particular kind).


I am not arguing here with anyone.
I am only offering patterns of logical argument.
No offence if someone is not interested.

You need to obey the laws of grammar else you are not expressing any valid logical terms.

[duszek]

Sorry, my mistake.

No posts from me any more since you are not interested.

Peace.

[Jaded Sage]

The first premise "all philosophy is God" is not a sure one.
Jady expressed the lack of certainty by putting the premise in an if-clause:

If all philosophy is God, ...

The syllogisms collapse if one of the premises is not true.
A syllogism is a highly speculative one if one of the premises is mere speculation itself.

That was my half-if-then-equation-half-stating-it-without-certainty-out-of-respect-for-the-processs. After that guy pointed it out I'm feeling quite certain indeed.

[duszek]

Yes, that´s why a forum like this one is very good.
Everybody can scroll back and see what was really said and what not.

Someone said that we need to draw sufficient conclusions from insufficient premises.
How is that supposed to work ? I wonder.

Most of the time the premises we have are severely insufficient.

[duszek]

The first premise "all philosophy is God" is not a sure one.
Jady expressed the lack of certainty by putting the premise in an if-clause:

If all philosophy is God, ...

The syllogisms collapse if one of the premises is not true.
A syllogism is a highly speculative one if one of the premises is mere speculation itself.

That was my half-if-then-equation-half-stating-it-without-certainty-out-of-respect-for-the-processs. After that guy pointed it out I'm feeling quite certain indeed.

So now you feel certain that all philosophy is God ?

Because all philosophy is aiming at wisdom and wisdom is God ?

[Jaded Sage]

So now you feel certain that all philosophy is God ?

Because all philosophy is aiming at wisdom and wisdom is God ?

That's not the reason. But actually I've had my suspicion for a looong time. I can't even tell you how long I've felt that the life of the mind is the kingdom of heaven. Then that guy pointed out a similarity, and I'm starting to get hooked. I'm usually slow to make big decisions like that. In fact, I would have been awefully envious if I ever still got that way.

Also, I don't like the phrase "all philosophy" as if it were a group of things. I just see it as one thing.

[Hobbes' Choice]

That's not the reason. But actually I've had my suspicion for a looong time. I can't even tell you how long I've felt that the life of the mind is the kingdom of heaven. Then that guy pointed out a similarity, and I'm starting to get hooked. I'm usually slow to make big decisions like that. In fact, I would have been awefully envious if I ever still got that way.

This sort of thing is best suited to a religious of mystically based Forum. It's not philosophy in any sense.

[Jaded Sage]

Mysticism is just unorganized philosophy. Some consider Plato a mystic, even Russell, apparently.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Mysticism is just unorganized philosophy. Some consider Plato a mystic, even Russell, apparently.

Which Russell?

Mysticism like any religion is just a system of short cuts: philosophical suicide. Easy answers, signifying nothing, meaning less.

[Jaded Sage]

Nope. Plato is also a mystic. Philosophy is organized mysticism. You should know which Russell. Apparently a lot of people agree. This is me semi-ignoring you until you have something productive to share. Peace.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Nope. Plato is also a mystic. Philosophy is organized mysticism. You should know which Russell. Apparently a lot of people agree. This is me semi-ignoring you until you have something productive to share. Peace.

Bertrand Russell is the only Russell of any worth in philosophy - but he was not mystic.

Apparently a lot of people agree.

Fallacy : Argumentum Vericundium

This is me semi-ignoring you until you have something productive to share.

This is you avoiding the truth of your own failure to think.