The difference between philosophy and religion.

BidenPresident said:
It is not clear Hegel was religious--at least in the conventional sense-- and many read him as an atheist.

For example, in the Phenomenology of Spirit he says there is nothing in revelation that cannot be had from using reason.
Click to expand...
The fact that there is even an intellectual debate about Hegel's Absolute Spirit and spirituality means you cannot divorce philosophy from religion.

Hegel's absolute spirit sounds a lot like the Vedic concept of Brahman, and universal spirit sounds more voodoo to me than anything I have heard about Confucianism or Universal Unitarianism.
 
BidenPresident said:
I think Cypress truly does not understand the difference between saying "here is what Kant said" and "here is what another author said about Kant."
Click to expand...

Everybody on the planet, including you, have learned about science, intellectual history, political history, anthropology etc. by reading books, articles, summaries, synopses, reviews, videos.

It is not possible to acquire information about the sum total of human knowledge by reading all the original source material.

That is exactly why the premminent philosopher Denis Diederot invented the Encyclopedia.


The way you readily dismiss subject matter experts and and scholars is deeply anti-intellectual
 
Cypress said:
Everybody on the planet, including you, have learned about science, intellectual history, political history, anthropology etc. by reading books, articles, summaries, synopses, reviews, videos.

It is not possible to acquire information about the sum total of human knowledge by reading all the original source material.

That is exactly why the premminent philosopher Denis Diederot invented the Encyclopedia.


The way you readily dismiss subject matter experts and and scholars is deeply anti-intellectual
Click to expand...


You refuse to distinguish reading Kant and commenting on it and reading a commentary on Kant.
 
BidenPresident said:
You refuse to distinguish reading Kant and commenting on it and reading a commentary on Kant.
Click to expand...
So your back to insinuating that the only way to have knowledge of human intellectual history is to read the thousands of years of original source publications of all of history's important thinkers.
 
BidenPresident said:
You actually lie on purpose.
Click to expand...
You keep saying if I don't read the original source material of Aristotle, I can't know anything about him.

Since you have never read the original text of the Affordable Care Act, the Build Back Better Act, and various Supreme Court Opinions, can you honestly say you have never acquired knowledge of them and therefore never and opine on them?
 
Cypress said:
You keep saying if I don't read the original source material of Aristotle, I can't know anything about him.
Click to expand...

No. I said don't present the words of others as your own. Seriously, every college freshman is expected to know this.
I think you are either incapable of understanding this or you deliberately lie. Either way, something is wrong with you.
 
BidenPresident said:
No. I said don't present the words of others as your own. Seriously, every college freshman is expected to know this.
I think you are either incapable of understanding this or you deliberately lie. Either way, something is wrong with you.
Click to expand...

So you dodge again and cannot answer a simple question.

Since you have never actually read the original text of the ACA or if the SCOTUS Roe v Wade opinion, is there any other ways for you to aquire knowledge of them and opine on them, or not?
 
Cypress said:
So you dodge again and cannot answer a simple question.

Since you have never actually read the original text of the ACA or if the SCOTUS Roe v Wade opinion, is there any other ways for you to aquire knowledge of them and opine on them, or not?
Click to expand...

I think you have some cognitive disorder preventing you from concentrating. Again, not joking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top