[Wittrs] Re: On Why Philosophy is Not Argument or Debate
- From: brendan downs <downs_brendan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 10:51:34 +1000
I disagree on philosophy is not argument. it hinges on ones conception of
agrument. yes people argue but that is not what philosophical argument is
about. Humans have the unique ability to assert something i.e. something that
is true or false, this is called a propositional statement. a philosophical
argument is comprised of premises and a conclusion that can be true or false,
valid or not valid, sound or unsound. your example "how do you like the taste?"
is not a statement capable of being true or false, it assets nothing. and in
some circles is not a subject of philosophy except in postmodernism.
technically we don't argue against people but construct conceptual arguments.
There is a vast array of possible statements available to us. Do we refuse to
study certain types of statements because someone doesnt like the flavour?
Meaning is use and we can break conventional rules of language i.e. we can call
a cat a mouse. Now lets move on...
WEB VIEW: http://tinyurl.com/ku7ga4
TODAY: http://alturl.com/whcf
3 DAYS: http://alturl.com/d9vz
1 WEEK: http://alturl.com/yeza
GOOGLE: http://groups.google.com/group/Wittrs
YAHOO: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wittrs/
FREELIST: //www.freelists.org/archive/wittrs/09-2009
Other related posts:
- » [Wittrs] Re: On Why Philosophy is Not Argument or Debate - brendan downs
