Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Philoso. students:nothing "absurd" till disproved?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
oscar111 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 12:38 AM
Original message
Philoso. students:nothing "absurd" till disproved?
Edited on Mon Jul-19-04 12:52 AM by oscar111
I had Philosophy classes in which we were told "no idea should be dismissed as ridiculous or absurd. They should all be dismissed only after evaluation."

Did you also learn this in class? A freeper type is claiming he teaches philo and that much is absurd.. including especially my post relating the above paragraph here.

I say "absurd" builds a box around the mind, and Gallileo was once absurd. Absurd, fosters authoritarianism, i say.

What did your professor teach?
Not what you think, i am wondering what the profs are buzzing among themselves and to classes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 12:41 AM
Response to Original message
1. Absolute truth is often a freeper belief
despite the continuous and steady case to be made against it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lazarus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 12:43 AM
Response to Original message
2. Minds can be open or closed
but think of a mind as a window. One that is permanently open is just as useless as one that is permanently closed.

A lot of this is subjective. How much evaluation?

If I posit that pixies deposit dew drops in the evening, do you need to "evaluate" the concept to determine that it is absurd?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oscar111 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Classes,friends, tell me what you were told by profs
I want to know what the for-hire prefessor community is saying about the question of "absurd", not reflections by my friends here. You are fine friends, but i am wondering what the prof community is buzzing on this idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ezod Donating Member (52 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. Pixies do drop dew drops in the night deposit...
sure as colorless green ideas sleep furiously! Permanence an illusion.
Absurd meaning literally "without ground" : an irrational universe made meaningful by man's existence. Wordy rappinghood only expressive as mind is open to interpretation...freeptard prefer absolute closed mind-meld of known viewpoint. Open window scary! Linkletter's daughter thought she could fly? Reality smacks as we hit the ground running...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beearewhyain Donating Member (291 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 12:48 AM
Response to Original message
3. Occam's Razor
Though this view often breaks down regarding politics. I guess it just goes to show that people are not rational, which by implication means, politicians are not rational. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
markses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 12:54 AM
Response to Original message
5. In philosophy, "absurd" is a technical term, or term of art
It refers to a specific quality of logical fallacy dealing with analytic self-contradiction.

Its more general use has none of this precision; in other words, the extension of "absurd" in common parlance is far wider. An actress can be "absurd" - and this is not necessarily a misuse of the term, since it follows common usage. However, if one was using the term absurd in a strictly philosophical sense, one would need to meet certain criteria of argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oscar111 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. markses, would you say that...
what the freeper dismissed, should be dismissed as absurd?
eg... "the rich should not be the only ones made immortal by genetics, just because they will be the only ones to afford it. Others are more deserving."

Freeper called "the whole argument absurd and not worth consideration".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Melodybe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. sounds like...
sounds like he was using the word in the broader sense. However, your argument that a class of people should not be entitled to immortality based on some artificial calculation, like wealth, is certainly not absurd in the stricter sense.There are also social consequences for even allowing such a thing to happen to anyone, much less be "bought" by the rich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oscar111 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Melodybe,i NOT advocate rich hogging immortality!
Edited on Mon Jul-19-04 07:19 PM by oscar111
Hi,
compatriot, greetings.. this is not a slam, just enthusiastic correction.
1 The first quote was a LW poster, arguinging that the rich ought not be allowed to hog immortality, ought not be the only ones by virtue of buying it.

2 the second quote was the freeper gal, calling the LW argument "absurd and not worthy of consideration". Freeper was using the word "absurd" against the LW commentator.

I strongly want immortality to go to all, free.

Philosophers are erring if they use the word absurd even for technical usage. It carts in heavy emotion. "self contradiction" is better term. Tell them to change terms. LOL as if they will listen.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Oct 01st 2014, 02:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC