This is my thread, no one is forcing you to participate here.
You can’t even have the human decency to form a fucking argument against anything I’ve said here. And you will “think about” making one so long as I dance to your little game? You can fuck off if that is what you think.
No really, I’m promising you that I’ll extend you that human decency. It’s just that, looking back over this thread, I’m really not at all clear on what your understanding of Hume’s position on the problem of, say, induction even is. I don’t understand what you’ve been saying when you refer to his gaps and voids and such. If you could restate your understanding of his position, in a clear and concise way, I’ll see if anything in his writings could possibly support your stated understanding.
Not at all; I’m not compelled. I just saw you getting frustrated at having to make your case with concrete arguments and hoped to explain why people are reacting the way they are.
It seems to be you that is frustrated and aggressive in your replies. Hence my thinking it was your problem.
I’ve read the Treatise and the Enquiries; the Treatise was the first “proper” philosophy book I read. Contrary to what my name might lead you to think, I’m not an unmitigated fan of his philosophy, but I like his style. And I’m certainly not saying that you don’t know what you’re talking about; I enjoyed the OP and (most of) the thread. I’m just saying that your presentation style in the last couple of pages doesn’t demonstrate it.
Please keep a more moderate tone in Philosophy.
lol