Is Scott dead?

Toadny · Post by **Toadny** » February 6th, 2013, 11:01 am

The forum seems to be filling up with rubbish. I've reported some of it but nothing has happened. The utterly idiotic "Stop. It" thread continues.

Spiral Out · Post by **Spiral Out** » February 6th, 2013, 12:00 pm

Politics and favoritism, everywhere.

February 12th, 2013, 4:12 pm

I'm alive.

EMTe · Post by **EMTe** » February 12th, 2013, 4:50 pm

I hoped he is, because we have completely different understanding of philosophy. For me philosophying means thinking about the world, based on ones life experience, fears, emotions, premonitions etc. Academic philosophy is my most hatred enemy, because it assumes that one should swallow wisdom from people who lived in the past and regurgitate it. It is totally wrong approach, because what is truly interesting about "philosophy" is why people from different eras come up with the same questions round and around. What is the point of existence, blah blah etc. Major task for modern thinker is to pull out these recurring questions from the pool of spam and ask himself - why Plato and XXI-st century teenager dimwit from Ozarks ask themselves the same questions?

Science is an answer. Philosophy, which accompanied human evolution throughout centuries was merely a companion in this journey, loyal Sancho.

So while I hope the best for Scott The Human I wish death for Scott The Philosopher.

Toadny · Post by **Toadny** » February 12th, 2013, 8:41 pm

EMTe wrote: Academic philosophy is my most hated enemy, because it assumes that one should swallow wisdom from people who lived in the past and regurgitate it.

Perhaps you will be pleased to learn that your most hated enemy is a figment of your imagination. Academic philosophy is nothing like that, students are constantly encouraged to challenge the ideas presented to them, whatever era the thinker in question came from, nobody is required to accept the ideas of past thinkers.

what is truly interesting about "philosophy" is why people from different eras come up with the same questions round and around.

I don't think that's a particularly interesting aspect of philosophy, we keep asking the same questions because those are the questions our existence throws up. Philosophical problems are likely to be longstanding, because they are difficult to solve, and that is part of what makes them interesting.

EMTe · Post by **EMTe** » February 13th, 2013, 5:35 pm

Toadny wrote:Perhaps you will be pleased to learn that your most hated enemy is a figment of your imagination. Academic philosophy is nothing like that, students are constantly encouraged to challenge the ideas presented to them, whatever era the thinker in question came from, nobody is required to accept the ideas of past thinkers.

No, I am not pleased. How about encouraging students to come up with their fresh, tabula rasa ideas, instead of infecting their minds with "knowledge" (philosophy is ignorance - not knowledge) of the ancients?

Toadny wrote:I don't think that's a particularly interesting aspect of philosophy, we keep asking the same questions because those are the questions our existence throws up. Philosophical problems are likely to be longstanding, because they are difficult to solve, and that is part of what makes them interesting.

Certainly it is not interesting for you, because you are a philosopher and youd want to stay one, even if youd be boiled alive.

"Existence" is merely biological existence - questions arise, because our brains are built in that way and not the other.

Problems are longstanding, because there are still people who don't want to take leap forward and accept the fact that it's not philosophy what is truly interesting, but philosophers.

Belinda · Post by **Belinda** » February 17th, 2013, 8:39 am

EMTe wrote:

I am not pleased. How about encouraging students to come up with their fresh, tabula rasa ideas, instead of infecting their minds with "knowledge" (philosophy is ignorance - not knowledge) of the ancients?

There is no tabula rasa. Tabula rasa implies that young children can be loaded up with info as if they were bottled beer.

This does not happen except in the case of rote learning. Philosophy does not thrive on rote learning but it does thrive with people who have been educated preferably from childhood to think critically.

If what you are deploring is teaching by means of rote learning the words of philosophers you should have a talk with your tutor or teacher about this because it matters that students are immersed in an educational ambience that permits the maximum development of the very natural curiosity of children and young people. It matters that the students are aware of the educational ethos of the institution that teaches thus.

The words of great philosophers are not for swallowing whole but for interpreting according to your very own critical faculty and according to the best that modern arts and sciences can supply.

EMTe · Post by **EMTe** » February 17th, 2013, 7:19 pm

Belinda wrote:There is no tabula rasa.

How about Kaspar Hauser. Certainly he is not truly "tabula rasa" in a philosophical sense and his life is drowned in the pool of myths and illusions, but there's something important at stake. Can we (will we ever be capable) proclaim Scott The Philosopher dead? Is it at all possible that philosopher will become a regular human again?