INFORMATION
This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used.
For further information, see our Privacy Policy.
Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.
We are not accepting any new registrations.
This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used.
For further information, see our Privacy Policy.
Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.
We are not accepting any new registrations.
Philosophical discussions elsewhere
Philosophical discussions elsewhere
After grumbling to Animist about the general crapness of the discussions on the Philosophy Now forum, today there are two new topics opened on articles in PN magazine.'How can we know anything at all?' and 'Moral Relativism and Cultural Chauvinism' Anyone up for a go at injecting new blood into a moribund site?
Editted to add: I've extended the same invitation to the Theologicans; so we might get to engage some of them on more neutral ground, where we can be a bit less 'irenic'. Could be fun!
Editted to add: I've extended the same invitation to the Theologicans; so we might get to engage some of them on more neutral ground, where we can be a bit less 'irenic'. Could be fun!
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: July 23rd, 2011, 2:50 pm
Re: Philosophical discussions elsewhere
I have added 'Irenic' to my vocabulary. I initially thought it might mean 'like Irene', but on checking it out its actual definition it is nothing like the Irene I knew.
Sure I'll pop along to PN.
Sure I'll pop along to PN.
Re: Philosophical discussions elsewhere
So close in form to 'Ironic', so far away in sense!
By the way I've just posted the following message on the Theologica site
By the way I've just posted the following message on the Theologica site
-
- Posts: 694
- Joined: July 16th, 2010, 12:48 pm
Re: Philosophical discussions elsewhere
I'm intrigued.
Neutral ground
Are there fundamental differences between Humanists and Philosophers? If so, what are they?Open discussion
"There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots." - From the film "Top Gun"
Re: Philosophical discussions elsewhere
No, Steven. I was talking about Humanists and Theologists meeting on PN's site to debate. Recently I have been making a rather polite nuisance of myself on the Theologica forum; but their rules require an irenic tone. So, since new threads have been opened recently concerning two issues important to both Humanist and theist world views, (Knowledge/Faith and Sources of Morality) on the Philosophy Now forum, I wondered if some THers and some Theologicans might meet on neutral ground for a debate.stevenw888 wrote:I'm intrigued.Neutral groundAre there fundamental differences between Humanists and Philosophers? If so, what are they?Open discussion
Could be rambunctious?
Re: Philosophical discussions elsewhere
I'm keen to get on the PN site, but seem to run into problems about user names. If/when I do get on, I may be Peter the Kermit or Petrus Animisticus (wish I'd used one or other on Theologica!)
Re: Philosophical discussions elsewhere
the obvious one is that humanism is itself a philosophy. Philosophers are just people who like to ramble on about whatever takes their fancy, and their orientation may be religious, atheistic, solipsistic, deterministic, or any other isticstevenw888 wrote:I'm intrigued.Neutral groundAre there fundamental differences between Humanists and Philosophers? If so, what are they?Open discussion