#analytic philosophy

[schibborasso]

Ludwig Josef Johann Wittgenstein philosophy of mathemathics

[vionerd]

[tagitables]

Glenn Van Brummelen, The Mathematics of the Heavens and the Earth The Early History of Trigonometry

[maddiviner]

Seen on Facebook. Seems on point. Though, TBF, what do I even know? I’m just a former future philosopher.

[victusinveritas]

[wittgensteining]

when you remember that whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent

[omegaphilosophia]

Why It Is Illogical to Equate God with Existence

The notion of equating God with existence has been a topic of philosophical and theological debate for centuries. While some argue that God and existence are inherently linked or even synonymous, there are compelling reasons to consider this equation illogical. This examination will explore the logical inconsistencies and philosophical challenges involved in equating God with existence.

Key Arguments Against Equating God with Existence

Category Error:

Concept: A category error occurs when things of one kind are presented as if they belong to another, or when attributes of one category are incorrectly attributed to another.

Argument: Equating God (typically considered a personal, conscious entity with specific attributes) with existence (a general state of being) involves a category error. Existence is an abstract concept, whereas God is often conceived as a specific being with distinct qualities.

Existence as a Predicate:

Concept: The philosophical debate over whether existence is a predicate (an attribute that a subject can have) is crucial here.

Argument: According to Immanuel Kant, existence is not a predicate that adds to the concept of a thing. For example, the concept of a unicorn does not change whether it exists or not. Similarly, defining God as equivalent to existence does not provide any substantive information about God’s nature or attributes.

Ontological Distinctions:

Concept: Ontology deals with the nature of being and existence. Distinguishing between different kinds of existence is vital.

Argument: Equating God with existence conflates different ontological categories. God is often seen as a necessary being (existing in all possible worlds), whereas existence includes both necessary and contingent beings. This conflation overlooks important distinctions in the nature of different kinds of existence.

The Problem of Attributes:

Concept: Theistic conceptions of God typically include specific attributes like omniscience, omnipotence, and benevolence.

Argument: Existence, as a broad concept, does not inherently possess these attributes. If God is equated with existence, it becomes unclear how these divine attributes are maintained or why existence itself should be imbued with them.

Logical Coherence:

Concept: Logical coherence requires that terms and concepts are used consistently and without contradiction.

Argument: Equating God with existence can lead to logical contradictions. For instance, if God is existence and existence is everything that exists, then God would include all forms of existence, including evil and suffering, which contradicts the notion of a benevolent deity.

Philosophical Perspectives

Theism and Deism:

Perspective: Traditional theistic views maintain a distinction between God and creation, where God is the creator and sustainer of existence but not synonymous with it.

Argument: Theism posits that while God is responsible for existence, God’s essence and existence are distinct from the existence of the created world.

Pantheism:

Perspective: Pantheism equates God with the universe or nature, implying that everything collectively is God.

Argument: While pantheism might seem to equate God with existence, it still distinguishes between the specific nature of the divine (as everything) and the abstract concept of existence itself.

Existentialism:

Perspective: Existentialist philosophers like Jean-Paul Sartre and Martin Heidegger explore existence as a fundamental human condition, often without invoking the concept of God.

Argument: Existentialism tends to separate the human experience of existence from divine attributes, emphasizing individual existence and meaning-making rather than equating existence with a divine being.

Analytic Philosophy:

Perspective: Analytic philosophy focuses on linguistic and logical clarity.

Argument: From an analytic perspective, equating God with existence introduces ambiguities and lacks precision, making it a problematic conceptual equation.

Equating God with existence involves significant logical and philosophical challenges. It conflates distinct categories, fails to address the nature of divine attributes, and introduces logical contradictions. By examining these issues, it becomes clear that maintaining a distinction between God and existence is more logically coherent and philosophically rigorous.

[blueheartbookclub]

Delving into the Depths of Thought: A Review of "The Problems of Philosophy" by Bertrand Russell

Bertrand Russell's "The Problems of Philosophy" stands as a timeless exploration of some of the most fundamental questions that have puzzled humanity for centuries. In this concise yet profound work, Russell embarks on a journey to unravel the mysteries of existence, knowledge, and reality, offering readers a thought-provoking introduction to the field of philosophy.

At the heart of Russell's inquiry lies the quest for knowledge and understanding. Through clear and accessible prose, he tackles age-old questions such as the nature of reality, the existence of an external world, and the limits of human perception. Drawing on insights from logic, mathematics, and the natural sciences, Russell challenges readers to critically examine their assumptions and beliefs, encouraging them to engage in rational inquiry and intellectual curiosity.

One of the key strengths of "The Problems of Philosophy" is Russell's ability to distill complex philosophical concepts into digestible and engaging discussions. Whether discussing the nature of space and time, the concept of truth, or the problem of induction, Russell presents ideas with clarity and precision, making them accessible to readers of all backgrounds. His use of concrete examples and thought experiments helps to illuminate abstract concepts, allowing readers to grasp the underlying principles more easily.

Moreover, Russell's work is not merely an intellectual exercise but also a call to action. Throughout the book, he emphasizes the importance of critical thinking and skepticism, urging readers to question authority and think for themselves. By encouraging a spirit of open-minded inquiry, Russell empowers readers to challenge received wisdom and explore alternative perspectives, fostering intellectual independence and freedom of thought.

In addition to its philosophical insights, "The Problems of Philosophy" also offers a historical perspective on the development of philosophical thought. Russell traces the evolution of philosophical ideas from ancient times to the modern era, highlighting key figures and movements that have shaped the discipline. By situating philosophical problems within their historical context, Russell provides readers with a deeper appreciation for the ongoing dialogue that has characterized philosophical inquiry throughout history.

Overall, "The Problems of Philosophy" is a timeless classic that continues to inspire and provoke readers with its profound insights and thought-provoking questions. Russell's lucid prose, rigorous analysis, and commitment to intellectual honesty make this book a must-read for anyone interested in philosophy, logic, or the pursuit of knowledge. In a world filled with uncertainty and confusion, Russell's work serves as a beacon of clarity and reason, guiding readers on a journey of philosophical discovery and self-reflection.

Bertrand Russell's "The Problems of Philosophy" is available in Amazon in paperback 12.99$ and hardcover 18.99$ editions.

Number of pages: 146

Language: English

Rating: 9/10                                           

Link of the book!

Review By: King's Cat

[eldestvirtuevic]

I find Quinean ontological realists mildly disturbing. I mean why are you making such a big deal out of existence of chairs?

[footnotes-2-plato]

Whitehead's Philosophy of Organism: Turning Idealism Inside Out [draft article]

Below is a draft of a chapter I was asked to write for a book on Cambridge Idealism. It is still a bit rough in places and I’ll be continuing to update it in the coming weeks and months. I’ll be presenting some of the ideas explored in it at the International Whitehead Conference in Munich next month. Feedback welcome! Introduction: The Whole in a Nutshell Despite many sharp disagreements with…

[emperornorton47]

[newagesurvivalist]

Stuck in the middle

We can't quite see the amenities of life. Why, I completely fucked up writing again. Nevertheless, there will be information and facts for the free man, the man of dignity. And here we will see the eventual collision of dreams.

As we plough through life, there is a frankly miniscule area of nonsense that we may have to get used to, to see through the endless cascade of myriad phenomena. In a game of chess, we experience moments of glory, incidents of greatness and sequences of cleverness. Sometimes we can wonder for what reason there is indeed so little to say at distinct times. It seems there is never an occasion to speak; or failing that, it doesn't seem worth it to say anything. In that paradigm, chess changes a factor. People are involved in a story in which the idea is ever the same, but the finesse is ever different. We see, in a game of chess there are a degree of life-lessons. The analysis, the concentration, the art of chess-playing is verily a fountain of inspirations, of salvations. On the other hand, it is just a game. Our attention goes out to an entirely artificial system which has no real-world connection. I like chess, as a sport, because it is very intelligent and has a lot of unexpected depth to it. But the thing is, we all do things, but there ain't no total meaning to work: we're all just stuck in mediocrity, and there is no way forward in the foundations of simple work. We try to live in a direct and logical way, but the liberation from life only comes when we livingly move into great stuff. Everything is stupid, but we try to stand up and come on, so that we perhaps don't need to play chess - in truth, there is not exclusivity to our daily routines, but verily just an infinite cascade of clever plans to make life a little bit better: and this is work, philosophy, heaven, Earth, command and discipline.

The words of The Netherlands are: I shall maintain, je maintiendrai in French. These legendary words come from the Protestant war hero William the Silent. In my opinion, he is an inspiring figure, but his struggle - possible the purest of all Christian struggles - stands out in its emptiness. In William's time, people breathed religion. It really was just a way of life. But the dramatic and subtle constructions of the Protestant theologians fall into dust when seen in the light of the Dutch rebellion. What was it all about? After William's death, The Netherlands developed into a prosperous and refined nation, with high quality art and great maritime and economic power. Did religion contribute in any way to this? People speak of the Calvinist work ethic; it seems people really did try to come into a closer, deeper relationship with God, but the enterprise of church society also shows that there was little to no concreteness to the articulations of the reformers. In many ways, this really is the true birth of realpolitik. Released from Catholic ritualism, the Protestants were free to focus on the task at hand and make an effort to institute a wordly state, one governed not by classes of monks and knights, but solely by administrators and stewards. Although there was still a lot of confusion, or one might say traditionalism, these stages betray the erection of an objective, impartial government.

I suppose this is all very unusual. The sounds of reform cannot be found in the normal straights of vehement logic and happiness; however, there is a chime of uprightness in the viccissitude of magnanimous life, which is full of eventful happenings: yet these strange affairs do not amount to anything substantive: the comings and goings of being stuck in madness sends us maniacally into the mystical territory of colonialism and veritable simplicity, just a conniving subset of menial attractions, but the constancy of meaning supports us in our combat versus the infidels, and there is much to be thankful for. In fact, the mania of systematicity is a fact, as everything is collected in information, and so although our lives are hollowed out the truth is suddenly re-envisioned in uprightness.

Contemplating the meaning of life is probably the most general act of thinking, or being, that we can do. Is it also the most futile? In a great many ways, thinking about the meaning of life relies on definite practical insights that occupy our mind and which mark our life. However, freedom lies in finding truth in details or occurrences. Language spoken can populate our existence with notions, with meditations, with reason. Obviously, human nature is to inquire penetratingly into the practical aspect of words, namely what it requires from us. At the same time, society depends on titbits. The purpose of the essay is certainly to treat of titbits, so as to make people enjoy them, or our of necessity. Information, facts, are found in scientific and scholastic disputations, but also, in humanistic collequy. And then you will say, what's the worth of base talk? Of deliberation? To do the not-doing, to clear one's mind, to become aware of the invisible creatures inhabiting our cells. I don't know. Life is an endlessly uphill journey. All we can do, is dissappear and reappear, come and go, live and let live. Happiness, true happiness, is winding down from tension - asserting non-assertion: wo go forth and multiply, yet we love each other. There is much to learn.

The value of a job is that you do meaningful things in a relaxed and organized fashion, but there is also the simple of process of dealing with the fall-out of determined fighting.Vincent van Gogh typified the human soul as a fighter, or contender. Verily, there is a fight going on, and things explode from time to time, leaving us without means. But there is a way of peace, of stalwardness, that nevertheless gives us the chance to prove ourselves. What can we do? Verily, what is lacking in life is people's appreciation of pretty conviviality, of synergy; we wish to move collectively to a higher goal; we like a unity of mind, togetherness, also freedom, that there may be work without responsibility, kindness without entrepeneurship. Why, what I find most appealing about contemporary society is truly the office space, with optimistic men and women showing up to work out problems, and tell the truth about a great manner of things. The things that mark our life are ever found in the catalysis, refining the mad grandeur of motif sorts of creative enterprise, because our desire remains to set forth subtle and invigorating philosophy and pay proper, sensible respect to the supernatural powers, to the factual anbd informational things. Certainly, a belief in God is sometimes a matter of course, a method through which we may recognize the possibiliy of answers - and we observe that conversations convey only the absurdity of God, or the im-possibility of religious guidance, religion. We see that there will be indeed a liberty in ministry, a lack of recognition where there is culture, indeed the solitariness of culture. So my positions stays that the world is destroying itself for no reason, liberties hold out against the horror and beauty of culture, everything returns to the same place. Our task is not to change the world, but to agree with it.

Potentially, that is all reverberating strangeness, but the hope of life will support our industry till the end, when there will be gnashing of teeth et cetera. However, our support does go forth into freedom; happiness continues to brighten our day; and freedom can give us respite in the last analysis.

[blueheartbooks]

Delving into the Depths of Thought: A Review of "The Problems of Philosophy" by Bertrand Russell

Bertrand Russell's "The Problems of Philosophy" stands as a timeless exploration of some of the most fundamental questions that have puzzled humanity for centuries. In this concise yet profound work, Russell embarks on a journey to unravel the mysteries of existence, knowledge, and reality, offering readers a thought-provoking introduction to the field of philosophy.

At the heart of Russell's inquiry lies the quest for knowledge and understanding. Through clear and accessible prose, he tackles age-old questions such as the nature of reality, the existence of an external world, and the limits of human perception. Drawing on insights from logic, mathematics, and the natural sciences, Russell challenges readers to critically examine their assumptions and beliefs, encouraging them to engage in rational inquiry and intellectual curiosity.

One of the key strengths of "The Problems of Philosophy" is Russell's ability to distill complex philosophical concepts into digestible and engaging discussions. Whether discussing the nature of space and time, the concept of truth, or the problem of induction, Russell presents ideas with clarity and precision, making them accessible to readers of all backgrounds. His use of concrete examples and thought experiments helps to illuminate abstract concepts, allowing readers to grasp the underlying principles more easily.

Moreover, Russell's work is not merely an intellectual exercise but also a call to action. Throughout the book, he emphasizes the importance of critical thinking and skepticism, urging readers to question authority and think for themselves. By encouraging a spirit of open-minded inquiry, Russell empowers readers to challenge received wisdom and explore alternative perspectives, fostering intellectual independence and freedom of thought.

In addition to its philosophical insights, "The Problems of Philosophy" also offers a historical perspective on the development of philosophical thought. Russell traces the evolution of philosophical ideas from ancient times to the modern era, highlighting key figures and movements that have shaped the discipline. By situating philosophical problems within their historical context, Russell provides readers with a deeper appreciation for the ongoing dialogue that has characterized philosophical inquiry throughout history.

Overall, "The Problems of Philosophy" is a timeless classic that continues to inspire and provoke readers with its profound insights and thought-provoking questions. Russell's lucid prose, rigorous analysis, and commitment to intellectual honesty make this book a must-read for anyone interested in philosophy, logic, or the pursuit of knowledge. In a world filled with uncertainty and confusion, Russell's work serves as a beacon of clarity and reason, guiding readers on a journey of philosophical discovery and self-reflection.

Bertrand Russell's "The Problems of Philosophy" is available in Amazon in paperback 12.99$ and hardcover 18.99$ editions.

Number of pages: 146

Language: English

Rating: 9/10                                           

Link of the book!

Review By: King's Cat

[tagitables]

Gottlob Frege, The Foundations of Arithmetic, A Logico-Mathematical Enquiry Into The Concept of Number

[spikybanana]

that our language have negative existential statements containing designators is kinda wild.

[ghelgheli]

one of the fundamental mistakes serano and a lot of others make involves the following line of reasoning:

1. some people have dysphoric other-gender embodiment-desires (e.g. for different genitals) before they acquire an understanding of gender-sex associations or even that there are genitals other than their own

2. if gender is totally socially constructed, as the social constructionists say, then these embodiment-desires would not be possible in such a state of ignorance

3. modus tollens the social constructionists are wrong and there must be some innate gender-desire

this is often accompanied by the following:

1. if social constructionism is right, then the abolition of gender would mean the elimination of dysphoric embodiment-desires

2. the state of knowledge prior to acquiring gender-sex knowledge is analogous to the state of affairs under gender abolition

3. in that state some people still have dysphoric embodiment-desires

4. modus tollens the social constructionists are wrong

these arguments are often defensive, to be fair—the first premise of the latter argument is unfortunately made by certain social constructionists too, steamrolling those early childhood experiences. but in both cases there is a circular mistake happening. the dysphoric embodiment-desires can precede gender-sex knowledge specifically because they are separable from it. penis-dysphoria in young childhood can only be called gender dysphoria if we assume the very gender-sex epistemic constructions we have agreed not to take for granted! and the former dysphoria may well persist in the absence of the latter constructions. this is what people say when they talk about a (utopian, perhaps, but nonetheless coherent and logically possible) gender abolitionist future where people can have whatever procedures they desire done. the embodiment-desires are still there! they are just freed from gender-sex associations.