The difference between philosophy and religion.

The vast majority of philosophers today are atheists. Otherwise, they would be doing theology.

Descartes talked about God, but it is not clear what he meant exactly.
 
In the 20th century, virtually no philosopher would make God a topic of their discussion. There are philosophers of religion, but that is an extremely small part of philosophy today.
 
BidenPresident said:
In the 20th century, virtually no philosopher would make God a topic of their discussion. There are philosophers of religion, but that is an extremely small part of philosophy today.
Click to expand...

1) Your thread didn't define this discussion as 20th century philosophy, but I can understand why you would take the lifesaver Mason threw you and try to backtrack and belatedly try to redefine the terms of the thread.

2) You don't get to speak for world philosophy. You have already demonstrated a complete lack of awareness of the Eastern intellectual tradition, and your extremely limited knowledge of human intellectual history is filtered through the narrow prism of western European secular thought.
 
Cypress said:
1) Your thread didn't define this discussion as 20th century philosophy, but I can understand why you would take the lifesaver Mason threw you and try to backtrack and belatedly try to redefine the terms of the thread.

2) You don't get to speak for world philosophy. You have already demonstrated a complete lack of awareness of the Eastern intellectual tradition, and your extremely limited knowledge of human intellectual history is filtered through the narrow prism of western European secular thought.
Click to expand...

You are a pathological liar.
 
BidenPresident said:
You are a pathological liar.
Click to expand...

The parameters of your own thread was "religion" with no time constraints.

It was only after Mason threw you a life saver that it occurred to you to backtrack and belatedly attempt to retroactively edit the thread parameters to the 20th century and Christian tradition.
 
Cypress said:
The parameters of your own thread was "religion" with no time constraints.

It was only after Mason threw you a life saver that it occurred to you to backtrack and belatedly attempt to retroactively edit the thread parameters to the 20th century and Christian tradition.
Click to expand...

You are a pathological liar.
 
Are French students taught to be more philosophical?

Issued on: 16/06/2011

Around 650,000 students will be taking the most anticipated end-of-year exam of French secondary school on Thursday: philosophy. Unlike other Europeans, the French are required to be prepared to "philosophise" before moving on to university.

The annual philosophy exam is the test that kicks off each year’s baccalaureate – a series of rigorous end-of-year exams one needs to pass in order to graduate from French secondary school and move into higher education.

On Thursday, French students will put on their thinking caps when they sit down to take the much-feared "philo" exam, as most French students call it, which stands out among the other subjects not just because it starts the week-long round of testing, but also because it’s the longest.

For four gruelling hours, every student in their last year of “lycée” is asked to respond in writing to one philosophical question. Examples from previous years include, “Can a scientific truth be dangerous?” and “Is it one’s own responsibility to find happiness?”

https://www.france24.com/en/2011061...exams-philosophy-europe-curriculum-university
 
BidenPresident said:
Issued on: 16/06/2011

Around 650,000 students will be taking the most anticipated end-of-year exam of French secondary school on Thursday: philosophy. Unlike other Europeans, the French are required to be prepared to "philosophise" before moving on to university.

The annual philosophy exam is the test that kicks off each year’s baccalaureate – a series of rigorous end-of-year exams one needs to pass in order to graduate from French secondary school and move into higher education.

On Thursday, French students will put on their thinking caps when they sit down to take the much-feared "philo" exam, as most French students call it, which stands out among the other subjects not just because it starts the week-long round of testing, but also because it’s the longest.

For four gruelling hours, every student in their last year of “lycée” is asked to respond in writing to one philosophical question. Examples from previous years include, “Can a scientific truth be dangerous?” and “Is it one’s own responsibility to find happiness?”

https://www.france24.com/en/2011061...exams-philosophy-europe-curriculum-university
Click to expand...

Now you are just appropriating ideas and themes from what I already posted

Cypress said:
This article is nine years old, but it suggests that Philosophy has been a part of French public education since the Napoleonic era, and French students are taught to try to think philosophically.


Are French students taught to be more philosophical?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.fr...exams-philosophy-europe-curriculum-university
Click to expand...
 
Taichiliberal said:
That's your opinion, Cy. One does not have to be recognized by the "official" standards or individuals that determine expertise, genius and originality. Case in point, civilizations that existed LONG before the Greeks came on the scene had their own philosophy of life....they existed (and some still exist) all over the continent of Africa and what we now call the "middle east". Here in America, the native people who were here for a millennia had their philosophy and such. Intellectual process was evident in the verbal and written histories, architecture, way of life. By your standards, these things don't exist unless the "experts" tell you otherwise. Reality, however, could care less what the "experts" think.
Click to expand...
My two cents:

All the math, all the history, all the science, all the philosophy, all the political theory which all of us on this board are acquainted with came from teachers textbooks, summaries, articles, journals, videos, documentaries produced by subject matter experts.

Simply put, all the knowledge everyone on this board has is derivative, and filtered and considered through our own experience.

That doesn't mean we can't come to some interesting insights on our own by integrating all this derivative knowledge.

But original and important human intellectual achievement is advanced by a relatively small number of truly creative and contemplative people - Darwin, Newton, Einstein, Wittgenstein, Nietzsche, John Locke, Thucydides, et al.
 
Cypress said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
That's your opinion, Cy. One does not have to be recognized by the "official" standards or individuals that determine expertise, genius and originality. Case in point, civilizations that existed LONG before the Greeks came on the scene had their own philosophy of life....they existed (and some still exist) all over the continent of Africa and what we now call the "middle east". Here in America, the native people who were here for a millennia had their philosophy and such. Intellectual process was evident in the verbal and written histories, architecture, way of life. By your standards, these things don't exist unless the "experts" tell you otherwise. Reality, however, could care less what the "experts" think.
Click to expand...



My two cents:

All the math, all the history, all the science, all the philosophy, all the political theory which all of us on this board are acquainted with came from teachers textbooks, summaries, articles, journals, videos, documentaries produced by subject matter experts.

Simply put, all the knowledge everyone on this board has is derivative, and filtered and considered through our own experience.

That doesn't mean we can't come to some interesting insights on our own by integrating all this derivative knowledge.

But original and important human intellectual achievement is advanced by a relatively small number of truly creative and contemplative people - Darwin, Newton, Einstein, Wittgenstein, Nietzsche, John Locke, Thucydides, et al.
Click to expand...

Nice try Cy, but you can't make a definitive statement on one end and they do a 180 to try and justify it.
NOTHING you stated even remotely affects the validity of my previous post. And riddle me this: all the folk you listed were recipients of what their society's individuals WHO WERE NOT CONSIDERED GENIUSES contributed. Food, clothing, utensils, how to survive in the environment, etc. Try being a "genius" when your butt is freezing because you don't know how to properly shelter or how to produce clothing for yourself....or for that matter properly find and/or store food, water.

The Vikings supposedly had no written language, yet they manufactured long trip sailing ships and forged swords that today cannot be easily duplicated in tensile strength. The Aborigines of Australia used their "magic" to light a signal fire that guided one of America's early manned orbital space flights when it was in trouble (they did NOT have a radio or TV in that part of the "Outback" at the time). Genius without recognition on all fronts. No shame or problem with acknowledging that later generations (i.e., you and I) greatly learn from such, but that does NOT validate your original statement. My assessments of your statements stand valid.
 
Cypress said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
That's your opinion, Cy. One does not have to be recognized by the "official" standards or individuals that determine expertise, genius and originality. Case in point, civilizations that existed LONG before the Greeks came on the scene had their own philosophy of life....they existed (and some still exist) all over the continent of Africa and what we now call the "middle east". Here in America, the native people who were here for a millennia had their philosophy and such. Intellectual process was evident in the verbal and written histories, architecture, way of life. By your standards, these things don't exist unless the "experts" tell you otherwise. Reality, however, could care less what the "experts" think.
Click to expand...



My two cents:

All the math, all the history, all the science, all the philosophy, all the political theory which all of us on this board are acquainted with came from teachers textbooks, summaries, articles, journals, videos, documentaries produced by subject matter experts.

Simply put, all the knowledge everyone on this board has is derivative, and filtered and considered through our own experience.

That doesn't mean we can't come to some interesting insights on our own by integrating all this derivative knowledge.

But original and important human intellectual achievement is advanced by a relatively small number of truly creative and contemplative people - Darwin, Newton, Einstein, Wittgenstein, Nietzsche, John Locke, Thucydides, et al.
Click to expand...

Nice try Cy, but you can't make a definitive statement on one end and they do a 180 to try and justify it.
NOTHING you stated even remotely affects the validity of my previous post. And riddle me this: all the folk you listed were recipients of what their society's individuals WHO WERE NOT CONSIDERED GENIUSES contributed. Food, clothing, utensils, how to survive in the environment, etc. Try being a "genius" when your butt is freezing because you don't know how to properly shelter or how to produce clothing for yourself....or for that matter properly find and/or store food, water.

The Vikings supposedly had no written language, yet they manufactured long trip sailing ships and forged swords that today cannot be easily duplicated in tensile strength. The Aborigines of Australia used their "magic" to light a signal fire that guided one of America's early manned orbital space flights when it was in trouble (they did NOT have a radio or TV in that part of the "Outback" at the time). Genius without recognition on all fronts. No shame or problem with acknowledging that later generations (i.e., you and I) greatly learn from such, but that does NOT validate your original statement on Post #133. My assessments of your statements stand valid.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Nice try Cy, but you can't make a definitive statement on one end and they do a 180 to try and justify it.
NOTHING you stated even remotely affects the validity of my previous post. And riddle me this: all the folk you listed were recipients of what their society's individuals WHO WERE NOT CONSIDERED GENIUSES contributed. Food, clothing, utensils, how to survive in the environment, etc. Try being a "genius" when your butt is freezing because you don't know how to properly shelter or how to produce clothing for yourself....or for that matter properly find and/or store food, water.

The Vikings supposedly had no written language, yet they manufactured long trip sailing ships and forged swords that today cannot be easily duplicated in tensile strength. The Aborigines of Australia used their "magic" to light a signal fire that guided one of America's early manned orbital space flights when it was in trouble (they did NOT have a radio or TV in that part of the "Outback" at the time). Genius without recognition on all fronts. No shame or problem with acknowledging that later generations (i.e., you and I) greatly learn from such, but that does NOT validate your original statement on Post #133. My assessments of your statements stand valid.
Click to expand...

I thought this thread was about intellectual achievement, but if you want to discuss technological achievement, I would rank the Paleolithic hunter who invented the Clovis point, the Portuguese navigator who invented the lanteen sail, and the Neolithic inventor of the composite bow to be profoundly influential on human achievement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top