I propose that all philosophers must hence forth only debate in terms of information. NOT that everything is only in our minds, and thus we can only debate relative values thereof.
You could say that discussing value judgements is it’s own philosophical discipline, but if you do then you are debating with yourself! …and only that. If you communicate a value judgement to me or anyone else, then you have just successfully exchanged information, and hence disproved that your value judgement is a value judgement.
Virtually every thread gets hijacked by this nonsense, and in a world full of information and communication, it’s about time that philosophy jumped out of the vat, and got back to it’s original and contemporary questionings.
If someone makes a philosophical statement, then for gods sake debate that! Do not spout a load of nonsense which has nothing to do with the topic. Repetition is moronic, either make a debate or go away and talk values with yourself.
Ok but, keep in mind not all have formal education. Philosophy will be handled different. I study nature to add to the reading I have done. I can’t prove my knowledge only give it. You must believe or not. Now if I were published and taught in schools, I would be quoted as either a fake or expert in any debate.
What makes a philosophy correct? Many testings or that it helps people and society even if it is way off the mark?
that’s not the same, I make abstract philosophies too. the problem is where everything is considered to be a value and the same in that. this makes all arguments aside from it redundant, but fails to recognise the derivative nature of information. e.g. it’s all in your mind/its all relative/subjective and you cant know anything.
How much time did you spend actually reading the oldest philosophers without an educator telling you what it all means?? The vast majority of people read a book once. They think they know the story. Rereading at different times and ages gives you a better perspective. Our minds skip over things we read and not see it or forget it. We lose so much with just one reading. Frank Herbert, a prime example of an author not understood because his writings were difficult , Holllywood screwed up the Dune series, few care. You get my points??? If not I will try again.
I quite agree, but in my mind your sentiment seems to be re-enforcing the philosophy in the op. It is better to look closely and accept there are basis to what you notice, rather than being lazy and thinking that nothing has meaning, utility and function in the world. Same applies to the meaning in fiction, as that is its reality.
No, I was not trying to reinforce the OP. Rather point out that aproaches are different, perspectives are different. This and other forums have people from across the world and different classes. British citizens here are a good example, you have the sophisticated and umm, not sophisticated , same with us from the US. Perhaps delving in deeper to valued opinions can lead to greater insight. To teach or to learn, which is most important? I would say both are equal. The teacher though must understand their students more then the students must understand their teacher.
That may be so, but the only way to have a debate which manifests new truths and information, is to accept there to be a world to debate. If everything is only in your mind, then you cant tell us anything. Philosophy should accept there to be a reality as anything else isn’t true, and if not then everything is a value without any value.
I don’t see how any of this denies freedom of expression, in fact i see it as enhancing that. you cannot truly share something if it is first thought to have no value.