Orwell allegedly claimed that intellectuals can believe anything, and this philosopher seems to fit the bill. Drowning in the 'white privilege guilt' Kool Aid, there is no end to his apologetic yammering (apparently using the term 'true north' is nordo centrism and insulting to people in the southern hemisphere).

Anyhow, we learn from him, among other post modern insights, is that the enlightenment and use of pure reason is 'a white male Euro Christian construction'.  Betcha didn't know that did you. Invoking logic is both racist and sexist. I guess by extension, other races (and women) don't use pure logic.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/opinionator/2015/07/02/looking-whit...

There was a thread here recently about anti-intellectualism in America. Stuff like this is perhaps part of the reason.

Views: 1170

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

There are so many problems that philosophy either does not address directly or only tackles tangentially: homelessness, yellow fever, drug addiction, naked credit default swaps, inner city gangs, hair balls in pet cats, the decay of infrastructure, rap music, abstract art, traffic in Los Angeles, whether Pluto is a planet, and interest rates.

It can only mean that philosophy is useless in the modern world. It was okay in the time of Plato and Aristotle when these problems did not exist, but philosophy has clearly been derelict in recent times. We should outlaw philosophy.

Dr. Clark, it would appear you're in agreement with Wittgenstein, who although a bit of a hack who probably shouldn't have been invited to Cambridge, is memorable for having declared that Philosophy is the disease for which it should be the cure.

Once again I had my lingual appendage in my buccal pouch.

The only way to conduct meaningful discourse in a world of irony-proof players!

Philosophy is the disease for which it should be the cure.

First, Bertold, I don't should (pronounced somewhat like "shit")on myself.

I seldom should on others

Second, philosophy is diseased. Here, identified in poetic* metaphor, is one reason.

"I think,

Therefore I am,"

Said the philosopher.

Bunk! He didn't feel; he only

Half was.

*A cinquain form devised by the American poet Adelaide Crapsey. Its five lines have two, four, six, eight and two syllables. Descartes' bunkum fell into lines 1 and 2.

My view? Philosophy exists mainly to provide employment for philosophy professors.

I saw the problem in courses the University of Florida required me to take. A professor there denied that existentialism was a philosophy. He was referring to the version devised by Sartre, who in the French Resistance had fought Nazi occupiers. Sartre's brutally short "There are no excuses" leaves philosophy professors with little to say.

For philosophers, having little to say is a fatal condition.

True north is used to differentiate from magnetic north.

Compasses point either north or south.Pick one...according to this guy, people in the unchosen hemisphere have a right to feel discriminated against.

What a waste of time this type of thinking is. I wonder what it's like going through life, searching for ways to be a victim.

There is a middle ground.

The brain evolved as a survival machine. Both human and animal brains are capable of learning from mistakes (as can a purely deterministic computer program) and modifying accordingly.

This guy it appears has become so wrapped up in his philosophical and political echo chamber that he has lost the ability to think realistically.

[Biological] brains are capable of learning from mistakes (as can a purely deterministic computer program) and modifying accordingly.

That's an interesting parallel, jay.

Decades ago I wrote code for a 3-D tic tic toe program that "learned" how to play the game.

The computer "learned" by storing all the moves and in later games using the early moves that led to wins.

Brain scientists do not yet know how the brain does what that code did.

I agree with Dr. Clark, and I have been accused of studying both Aristotle and Plato. I know very little about either man and studying philosophy has very little to do with atheism. It's trolls that make up this stupid shit to attach you with.

This brings me to your comment, Daniel. I do blame people for saying stupid shit. It would never dawn on me that they had no choice when they said it. Of course they do, and they can say stupid shit at any time without a god being involved in it.

The postmodernists I studied said everyone has a narrative.

I've been a white male since December of 1930 (almost 85 years) and I find it reasonable to conclude that my narrative does not encompass the narratives of others.

I find passive aggressives hard to deal with. I have to drag their narratives out of them sentence by sentence,

Women don't use pure logic? lol 

No one uses pure logic. Not men, not women. We are also emotional human beings. Men are not immune to emotion. I find these topics not so much sexist as they are just blatantly ignorant. 

It's important to understand how we think and reach conclusions in both philosophy and in everyday life. There is no question that in ordinary situations where we need to reach quick decisions on questions of relatively low importance, human beings do not depend much on logic and reason. Usually we don't need to.

There is another realm in which we do need to rely on careful reasoning and that is the realm of decisions with long term or widespread implications. In drafting a law or a contract, reaching a verdict, choosing a medical treatment, designing a scientific experiment, or marketing a product we have gradually learned that we are better off with logic than with prejudice. 

The so-called scientific method has been enormously successful in promoting human welfare, but there has been a reaction against it by postmodernists who claim that it is not the objective it is supposed to be, but the creation of European white males who are improperly dismissive of other ways of reaching truth. The slogan was: there are no truths, only interpretations. This led to a lot of nonsense in which all interpretations were valued equally. That extreme has proved absurd and postmodernism has faded considerably. It had one salutary effect and that was to make people aware that metanarratives color much of our thinking.

RSS

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service