[OLD] Philosophy Forums Rules [OLD]
- Misty
- Premium Member
- Posts: 5934
- Joined: August 10th, 2011, 8:13 pm
- Location: United States of America
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
The eyes can only see what the mind has, is, or will be prepared to comprehend.
I am Lion, hear me ROAR! Meow.
- Niebieskieucho
- Posts: 28
- Joined: December 20th, 2015, 5:53 am
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
Thanks for doing it for me or instruct me.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15154
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
Cheers.
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5787
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
@Niebieskieucho You can control your email subscription in the following tab of the User Control Panel: http://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/ucp.php?i=174Niebieskieucho wrote:I'd like to quit this forum and unsubscribe. Unfortunately, cannot find information where to do it.
Thanks for doing it for me or instruct me.
You are also free to not participate or participate as you wish.
I hope that helps
If you need further assistance, please send me a private message.
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
- SunkenBubble
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 6
- Joined: June 8th, 2016, 8:18 am
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
-
- Posts: 81
- Joined: August 22nd, 2016, 12:08 am
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
- Felix
- Posts: 3117
- Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
And last but not least: cast not thy pearls before swine.I would like to summarize the Philosophy Forums Rules by quoting the pledge of the 4H Club: "As we mingle with others, let us be diligent in labor, courteous to everyone and above all honest and fair in the game of life."
- Jaya
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 0
- Joined: December 7th, 2016, 9:08 am
A question to the forum
A book has been published under the title 'The Upanishads: A Study of the Original texts' by MLBD Publishers, New Delhi, India. The year of publication is 2016. There is a chapter in this book which discusses about 'The World and the Mandukya Upanishad'. Is it possible to discuss the above topic in this forum?
- Jaya
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 0
- Joined: December 7th, 2016, 9:08 am
Re: A doubt about uploading a chapter for discussion
- Sage4557
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 7
- Joined: February 5th, 2017, 11:20 am
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
- DouglasTheAwesome
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: March 1st, 2017, 7:21 pm
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
- -1-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
What I am complaining about is that some people don't see their own mistakes when they are pointed out to them, and instead of acknowledging them, they call the critiquer out on being irrational and incomprehensible.
What to do in such cases?
- Spiral Out
- Posts: 5014
- Joined: June 26th, 2012, 10:22 am
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
Logic is subjective. What is logical to one may not be logical to another. It's a matter of opinion. Also, it's an inherent part of debate to attack someone's arguments. What's your definition of "reasonable"? There's no objective rules to logic or reason.-1- wrote:I don't see among the rules violations of logic, violations by self-contradictions, and violations by ignoring the pointing out of self-contradictions. I also don't see violations by calling some debating opponent's arguments "irrational" and "meaningless" and "zig-zagging" when they obviously are not, to a mindful and reasonable reader.
Well, if they cannot see the logic or the sense in the critique then what else would they say?-1- wrote:What I am complaining about is that some people don't see their own mistakes when they are pointed out to them, and instead of acknowledging them, they call the critiquer out on being irrational and incomprehensible.
Just move on. Are you trying to change their point of view? Are you trying to make them understand your point of view. Neither may be possible. I have tried many times to convey my own understanding of the Void but with little effect.-1- wrote:What to do in such cases?
- -1-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
How DARE you to write that on a philosophy site? Logic is the ONLY thing in all human endeavour that is NOT subjective.Spiral Out wrote: Logic is subjective.
I am so angry reading this that I could blow up.
If you really think this, then in my opinion they should revoke not only your privileged status of whatever, but also your membership in this club.
"Logic is subjective." Now I've heard it all.
And please allow me to make you to get one thing straight: I am not being disrespectful. You are. To the entire field of philosophy.
If I get kicked out of this site because I left this very post, I will wear it as a badge of honour.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Philosophy Forums Rules
That would not be a logical response.-1-:
How DARE you to write that on a philosophy site? Logic is the ONLY thing in all human endeavour that is NOT subjective.Spiral Out:
Logic is subjective. What is logical to one may not be logical to another.
I am so angry reading this that I could blow up.
The formal structure of a logic is objective in so far as the rules are internally consistent, that is, anyone playing by the rules should reach the same conclusion, but we can construct different logics with different rules. The rules of logic do not exist in some Platonic realm.
On this forum and elsewhere we find individuals who claim that their arguments are logical and therefore anyone who disagrees with them is being illogical. That you are being logical and someone who disagrees with you is not may very well your subjective opinion. If philosophy were simply a matter of formal logic then we would logically expect its history to mirror that of mathematics.
There is another sense in which we might say that logic is subjective, or more precisely, that logic is not coextensive with reality. The claim that what is illogical is impossible is an epistemological claim, not an ontic fact. Our inability to conceive of something marks a limit to thought, and unless one holds along with Parmenides that thinking and being are the same, not a limit to what is or was or will be. This is the key to understanding Aristotle’s discussion of something coming from nothing.
Parmenides brings us logically to Hegel and his Science of Logic, but this is not the place to follow the dialectical movement of his logic and the overcoming of the distinction between objective and subjective logic or thinking and being.
2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
2023 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023