doctorcrimson

doctorcrimson t1_j9xbuuf wrote

Reply to comment by passengera34 in Reality is an openness that we can never fully grasp. We need closures as a means of intervening in the world. | Post-postmodern philosopher and critic of realism Hilary Lawson explains closure theory. by IAI_Admin

I love how you just cheered for ignorance of science in that first part, basically making my case for me. Reproducibility of results and verification by multiple parties is the only way we know anything, it is constantly proving more accurate than beliefs of any single individual.

1

doctorcrimson t1_j9x1g98 wrote

Reply to comment by Historical_Tea2022 in Reality is an openness that we can never fully grasp. We need closures as a means of intervening in the world. | Post-postmodern philosopher and critic of realism Hilary Lawson explains closure theory. by IAI_Admin

A lump of mush and neurons rattling around inside a osseus tissue cavity. We know that because every person who has ever been examined by millions of certified modern professionals says it is so. It was the same yesterday and will be the same tomorrow. Therefor any one of us being any different would be beyond what is statistically possible.

Thats whats real. We can know it very easily and without faith.

1

doctorcrimson t1_j9x0yrw wrote

Reply to comment by passengera34 in Reality is an openness that we can never fully grasp. We need closures as a means of intervening in the world. | Post-postmodern philosopher and critic of realism Hilary Lawson explains closure theory. by IAI_Admin

If we dont use science as our basis for knowledge of reality then we have absolutely no basis for reality, because nothing else even comes close. We do have it, though, and it is highly accurate, and so choosing not to use it is ignorance.

1

doctorcrimson t1_j9x0kgh wrote

Reply to comment by zazzologrendsyiyve in Reality is an openness that we can never fully grasp. We need closures as a means of intervening in the world. | Post-postmodern philosopher and critic of realism Hilary Lawson explains closure theory. by IAI_Admin

No, it was a pretty simple idea, cannot think of a way to make it any easier to digest. The more math you know the more you see the similarity in how everything is described through mathematics.

0

doctorcrimson t1_j9tup2x wrote

Reply to Reality is an openness that we can never fully grasp. We need closures as a means of intervening in the world. | Post-postmodern philosopher and critic of realism Hilary Lawson explains closure theory. by IAI_Admin

I disagree that we cannot or do not quantify or define what is real. Philosophies like this, to me, always read as an ignorance of science or a poor excuse not to look behind the curtain that is your current shallow understanding of a subject. Best part is, when you start to get far enough along into mathematics and statistics, you realize it all sort of ties back together.

−8

doctorcrimson t1_j9f0fss wrote

Reply to Often mischaracterized as a rather debaucherous, hedonistic philosophy, Epicureanism actually focuses on the removal of pain and anxiety from our lives, and champions a calm ‘philosophy as therapy’ approach in pursuit of life’s highest pleasure: mental tranquility. by philosophybreak

Often mischaracterized as hedonism, epicureanism is actually [goes on to describe hedonism].

Like bro, you basically argued an excuse for rich people to practice ignorance of the consequences of their actions.

I will say that at least Epicureanism plans for long term happiness, but I still see no traces of selflessness in it.

−42

doctorcrimson t1_j6n4axp wrote

Reply to Happiness is an essentially nihilistic ideal — it is the best goal to follow when there is nothing else on the table. A meaningful life on the other hand can embrace more of life including struggles and suffering because it is oriented towards a higher ideal by thelivingphilosophy

Rather than Nihilistic I think this thought process more approaches a sort of selfish dogmatism, doesn't it?

Both immediate satisfaction and marginal lifelong satisfaction based decision making for individuals seems very much uncharacteristic of a civilised individual displaying empathy in any broad sense.

−1