1
   

Truthsearchers! Go To Science Forum Afar!

 
 
Tsar
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2010 02:38 pm
@Pepijn Sweep,
I don't know what "truth" means, so I won't reflect on the original statement.

I would use the word "happiness" instead, whose meaning, though equally vague, is nevertheless more vivid.

I do not want to generalise, but it seems to me that philosophy always fails to make a thinking person happy. Every attempt to find satisfaction in philosophical reasoning is in vain.

In science there are moments of happiness, when a question finds its answer. Of course, further questions follow, but one is somehow certain that no question has no answer. This in turn guarantees more happy moments.

The problem is that language suits better to practise science than to articulate one's disability to practise philosophy as a science.

It seems that philosophy does not provide knowledge, because philosophy is unable to formulate questions. Thus philosophy always goes side by side with dissatisfaction and hope for happiness.

There might be people talking nonsense here. But it is only because their language has begun to show them its outer limits. Instinctively they come in hope to overcome the disability to express themselves. In fact, without knowing this, they are here in order to look for ways to come to grips with the burden of language and thus rise above philosophy.
Pepijn Sweep
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2010 03:04 pm
@Tsar,
Tsar;144801 wrote:
I don't know what "truth" means, so I won't reflect on the original statement.

I would use the word "happiness" instead, whose meaning, though equally vague, is nevertheless more vivid.

I do not want to generalise, but it seems to me that philosophy always fails to make a thinking person happy. Every attempt to find satisfaction in philosophical reasoning is in vain.

In science there are moments of happiness, when a question finds its answer. Of course, further questions follow, but one is somehow certain that no question has no answer. This in turn guarantees more happy moments.

The problem is that language suits better to practise science than to articulate one's disability to practise philosophy as a science.

It seems that philosophy does not provide knowledge, because philosophy is unable to formulate questions. Thus philosophy always goes side by side with dissatisfaction and hope for happiness.

There might be people talking nonsense here. But it is only because their language has begun to show them its outer limits. Instinctively they come in hope to overcome the disability to express themselves. In fact, without knowing this, they are here in order to look for ways to come to grips with the burden of language and thus rise above philosophy.


Let's applaude Hermes tri-Times
But Nothing Risis Above Sophia

Pepijn Sweep's
Magister
:bigsmile:
0 Replies
 
jack phil
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2010 09:57 pm
@HexHammer,
Well, the science forum can talk about facts. And there might be some talk of facts here, but we ought talk about what facts are useful for, ie, logic.

And it is as impossible for man to speak something illogical as it is for him to think what cannot be thought. As per another recent thread by Reconstructo, 'the real is the rational (and vice versa).'

As for truth, big T truth, I guess it would be a tautology. And I could never confuse a (scientific) hypothesis for a tautology. And so if one is a truth seeker in earnest, then I can see no reason in following hypotheses.
0 Replies
 
north
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2010 10:10 pm
@HexHammer,
truthsearchers , will go where they must to seek truth

as they should

hopefully though using balanced reason along the way
Pepijn Sweep
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Mar, 2010 01:17 am
@north,
north;144979 wrote:
truthsearchers , will go where they must to seek truth

as they should

hopefully though using balanced reason along the way


[CENTER]:bigsmile:
Not To-Day / No Way

Balance is Comphy; findin' thruth is not
Reason is Long gone; Made Up Mind U

With Kind Rea-spects,

Pepijn SH Sweep's
Magister bij't IJ
:cool:
[/CENTER]
0 Replies
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Mar, 2010 02:32 pm
@HexHammer,
HexHammer;144271 wrote:
But let's not dodge the real matter at hand, it's more likely to discover truths in sience fora than philosphy fora ..that should be a truth and a fact.

Love of Sophia is not True ?

Pepijn So
:detective:
0 Replies
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Mar, 2010 02:10 pm
@froach,
froach;144771 wrote:
yes loving sophia:bigsmile:

I drown my thyme plant O}, shame beautiful pink flowers


Next Year Btween some heather, or sandy ground, or both [oxy]

Liefs uit :looking:

Holland:a-ok:
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 06/15/2021 at 09:08:10