Secular, Social, Scientific
Sorry to begin with this part of really tricky dogmatics. It will be a dance around minute decisions, but, promised!, of tremendous consequence (as any encounter with dogmatics – yes, I know). A tour with Godless Mom™ can, perhaps,... Read More | Share it now!
This was a recent Quora question and it keeps puzzling me. Is reality subjective or objective? If it is subjective is every interpretation of it correct? It is not that difficult to reject this question as what it is: an assumption supported by an... Read More | Share it now!
We have silently taken the 400 fans threshold this week with our Facebook page. That is not very much and I will make this a silent post just with a bit of statistics and insight. We are making 100 new fans per year. You really do better with an... Read More | Share it now!
Ludwig Wittgenstein, Wittgenstein’s Lectures on the Foundations of Mathematics Cambridge, 1939, ed. by Cora Diamond (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989), 300 pages. Publisher’s link. This is the first in a series of posts, outlining... Read More | Share it now!
Must Christianity be Empirically Falsifiable? It was the subtitle that caught my attention in Dave Armstrong’s recent Patheos post: — …in Order to be Rationally Held? Positivist Myths and Fallacies Debunked by Philosophers and... Read More | Share it now!
Dear Ryan, this posting has been on my list far too long. I loved this your diagram of the realism/anti-realism antagonism. The very topic is cool. Most people will shake their heads about the options you are presenting. “Where exactly is the... Read More | Share it now!
This is not really a question Let me first examine the question in its functionality. It is essentially a move “theists” (today a term atheist are keeping alive) might make to vex atheists over their particular problems with agnosticism. It is... Read More | Share it now!
I think that is a very useful distinction you have made between “as soon as”, “always when” and “because”. Let me try to explain “because” as I understand it. Take a moment in time t1. (Actually there are no such things as moments... Read More | Share it now!
This is definitely a non-topic. Ludwig Wittgenstein’s On Certainty – thoughts compiled from April 1950 to April 29, 1951 – does not show any clearer interest in “conspiracy theories”. The very phrase could be there and isn’t. Mental... Read More | Share it now!
continuing: Logical positivism debunked (1): The philosophy that cannot even prove that its own statements have a “meaning” In the Laundry. You are handed back your belongings all washed, and you notice that this is not your jacket. Actually... Read More | Share it now!
Logical positivism: all statements that can't be empirically verified are meaningless. — Ryan (@ryan_the_kang) March 11, 2014 Response to logical positivism: you can't empirically verify that claim… — Ryan (@ryan_the_kang)... Read More | Share it now!
What would the world look like if logical positivism had been “debunked”? – A question I have been requested to answer on Quora (“your best source for knowledge”, so the advertisement). (I hate these sources that ask you instead... Read More | Share it now!
I recently listed Ludwig Wittgenstein as one of three essential philosophers who can add surprising clarity and vital new perspective to frustrating debates about ethics, political ideology and the practical problems of our planet. What’s most... Read More | Share it now!