Stosh Posted January 4, 2013 ..... Proofs of consistency which are based on models, and which argue from the truth of axioms to their consistency, merely shift the problem. Ok , I think I agree but whats the problem? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted January 4, 2013 No problem at all, the PoMo is as good a philosophical turn as is any other, was just aiming to respond to the OP question. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zerostao Posted January 4, 2013 E.g. a box is only named such so that someone else knows what I am referring to. There is no absolute object in the universe called a box. The box is a collection of smaller parts. egads, there is a dead cat in that box. yeah postmodern world and its signs and signified signifiers,,hitchcock movies, north by northwest and vertigo. but out there in the postmodern arena stands a bull that must be faced. the bull's name is derrida.i am still enjoying the scruton book on beauty by the way......i still think pink floyd is the perfect representation of postmodern world, hahaha (as in the laughter of eclipse) i sit with popcorn waiting for sinfest to face derrida 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted January 4, 2013 (edited) E.g. a box is only named such so that someone else knows what I am referring to. There is no absolute object in the universe called a box. The box is a collection of smaller parts. egads, there is a dead cat in that box. yeah postmodern world and its signs and signified signifiers,,hitchcock movies, north by northwest and vertigo. but out there in the postmodern arena stands a bull that must be faced. the bull's name is derrida.i am still enjoying the scruton book on beauty by the way......i still think pink floyd is the perfect representation of postmodern world, hahaha (as in the laughter of eclipse) i sit with popcorn waiting for sinfest to face derrida Are you certain the cat is dead? LOL Haven't read Derrida but Foucault and Deleuze 'Thousand Plateaus' is interesting. Edited January 4, 2013 by ralis Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stosh Posted January 4, 2013 This derrida ? To his critics, Mr. Derrida appeared to be a pernicious nihilist who threatened the very foundation of Western society and culture. By insisting that truth and absolute value cannot be known with certainty, his detractors argue, he undercut the very possibility of moral judgment. To follow Mr. Derrida, they maintain, is to start down the slippery slope of skepticism and relativism that inevitably leaves us powerless to act responsibly. This is an important criticism that requires a careful response. Like Kant, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche, Mr. Derrida does argue that transparent truth and absolute values elude our grasp. This does not mean, however, that we must forsake the cognitive categories and moral principles without which we cannot live: equality and justice, generosity and friendship. Rather, it is necessary to recognize the unavoidable limitations and inherent contradictions in the ideas and norms that guide our actions, and do so in a way that keeps them open to constant questioning and continual revision. There can be no ethical action without critical reflection. Seems like it would be a potentially friendly meeting to many TTBs Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zerostao Posted January 4, 2013 i think you found him , stosh, well cats have 9 lives we are told , so i cannot be certain of the felines demise, which may have been greatly exxagerated. here i am wondering, where do all of these french intellectualist come from anyways? new face in the crowd;http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/step-aside-sartre-this-is-the-new-face-of-french-intellectualism-1332028.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Birch Posted January 4, 2013 "skepticism and relativism that inevitably leaves us powerless to act responsibly." Funny, I say that it doesn't do that if you practice skepticism and relativism hardcore. Sounds like an interesting book ZT! --opinion-- Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
konchog uma Posted January 4, 2013 Human primates are obsessed with the 'isness' of objects that have no inherent identity except what human primates designate as such. Elaborate attempts to describe the Tao even in terms if Yin/Yang are futile. agreed thats the main reason that i insist that daoism and buddhism are two sides of the same coin.. they both agree that what is going on here (reality, if you will) is completely beyond all attempts to conceptualize it. Thats also why i suspect that reality as a whole is a mystery, utterly unknowable. i still give a hearty *facepalm* to anyone who disagrees based on buddhist or daoist logic. (i acknowledge that much can be known btw, just feel that ultimately, there is far more which isn't and i would guess cant be known) 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stosh Posted January 4, 2013 One doesnt really need to know everything ,as I see it theres a point where one is overshooting that which gives practical answers to the ultimate question of, What do I do now? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
konchog uma Posted January 4, 2013 (edited) right which is the crux of buddhism right there. shakyamuni had a lot of followers who said to him "we will follow you if you tell us what is eternal, and do human beings have a soul, and where did reality come from, and what is absolute" etc.. it was big in india at that time to be concerned about such things.. and the buddha said to them that they were like a man who has been shot on the battlefield through the eye with an arrow, and is talking to the doctor who is there to pull the arrow out, saying "you can not pull this arrow out until i know the nationality of the man who shot me, and what kind of horse he was riding, and was it a longbow or a shortbow, and what kind of bird gave the feather which guided this arrow?" To him it was completely silly to be concerned with anything except our present condition and how to better it. not to inundate with buddhism, but thats my background, so you know.. sometimes it slips out lol Edited January 4, 2013 by konchog uma Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted January 4, 2013 Derrida the Movie here. Knock yourselves out.... http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=TswHCM2cOmg&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DTswHCM2cOmg&gl=GB Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zerostao Posted January 4, 2013 stosh you are sounding like a pragmatic american. speaking of differeance, and why is american academia so enamored with these french intellectualists? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted January 4, 2013 (edited) LOL What is that movie please? Edited January 4, 2013 by GrandmasterP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted January 4, 2013 (edited) Maybe this will put all the anthropocentric arguments of human primates in proper perspective. Just click on the file to view the phylogenetic tree of life tree.pdf Edited January 4, 2013 by ralis Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted January 4, 2013 Or this one maybe..... https://sites.google.com/site/sjlewisprojects/Home/the-ascent-of-man 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted January 5, 2013 Waiter...Would sir like sauce with that? Diner...Yes please. Waiter...feck off big nose! There's saucy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
