 |
| |
|
|
Agathon
|
 |
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
Philosophers write out hypotheses and then jump for joy, and go home... |
No they don't.
quote:
The problem with this is you assume no one else can have the same ideas as those philosophers had, and further without them we wouldn't have had the work done by Dalton, etc. |
The fact that the theory is called the atomic theory works against your case.
quote:
And again, I'm still REALLY confused why you keep citing all these old people. I've said before that ancient philosophers were quite useful, but modern ones are not. To counter this, you cite all kinds of ancient philosophers? |
Recognition of profound shifts takes time. It would take too long to completely explain how 20th century philosophy leeches into the cultural environment. Here's one example: Robert Nozick's "Wilt Chamberlain" argument from "Anarchy, State and Utopia" was incredibly influential in the circles of political science. Look it up and you will see why. Nozick thought this up himself - he was a philosopher.
quote:
You don't seem to understand the case... |
Like hell I don't. You won't wriggle out that way.
quote:
Ethics should not be taught in a classroom. 
Everyone has their own ethics, don't philsophers understand that?  |
That is an option that some philosophers consider (it is called individual relativism). But it is debatable and the only people debating it are, surprise, philosophers.
Imagine if medical ethics was conducted along these lines, it would be a disaster. You honestly live in a dream world.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
No they don't. |
Oh? What did Plato do to prove his hypotheses, what did Democritus do?
quote:
The fact that the theory is called the atomic theory works against your case. |
Did Dalton call it this, or was it named that after? 
quote:
Recognition of profound shifts takes time. |
LOL. Nice try...
In other words "Nothing that we can see! But in 1000 years, 1 in 1000 philosophers of today will be proven to be correct about something."
quote:
Like hell I don't. You won't wriggle out that way. |
If you understood the case, you wouldn't have listed ancient philosophers...
quote:
That is an option that some philosophers consider (it is called individual relativism). |
See? They take something that's common sense (not everyone has the same code of ethics), slap on some fancy word to it, then...
quote:
But it is debatable and the only people debating it are, surprise, philosophers. |
...waste everyone's time by debating it, using public funds no less.
quote:
Imagine if medical ethics was conducted along these lines, it would be a disaster. |
Medical ethics are decided by the owners of the hospitals which employ doctors, how many of those owners are philosophers?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
They argued. |
Bickering proves something, how?
Maybe in the wonderful, mystical land of philosophy that constitutes as a proof...
quote:
It didn't used to be common sense. |
I'm not talking about anything eight hundred years ago, I don't care about that.
I'm talking about here, and now...
It is common sense that people have different sets of ethics, and to bother debating about it is a waste of time.
quote:
This is even more astonishingly ignorant than the rest. Not only do you know nothing about philosophy, or the history of ideas, but you also appear to be completely unaware of the way the medical system works. |
Well, obviously my example took an American slant to it.
Medical ethics aren't ruled by philosophers, regardless of what you're trying (very unsuccessfully) to argue. Sure, philosophers argue about it constantly, but it doesn't do anything... Medical ethics depend on whatever is considered acceptable by the public, not what some philosophers think at the University of Toronto...
quote:
"Did 17th century people learn Classics?". "Hospital ethics are determined by the owners', etc. etc. |
Do you understand how the US healthcare system works at all?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
|
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
Bickering proves something, how?
Maybe in the wonderful, mystical land of philosophy that constitutes as a proof... |
So arguments don't count as proof. Jesus Christ.
quote:
I'm not talking about anything eight hundred years ago, I don't care about that.
I'm talking about here, and now...
It is common sense that people have different sets of ethics, and to bother debating about it is a waste of time. |
If you say so. Of course things will never change from now on so common sense must be right.
quote:
Well, obviously my example took an American slant to it. |
Nice try, but it won't work.
quote:
Medical ethics aren't ruled by philosophers, regardless of what you're trying (very unsuccessfully) to argue. Sure, philosophers argue about it constantly, but it doesn't do anything... Medical ethics depend on whatever is considered acceptable by the public, not what some philosophers think at the University of Toronto... |
Gee whiz, I'll tell that to the bunch of healthcare professionals I gave a series of lectures to back in New Zealand. And I'll also tell that to the Bioethics institute at U of T which is world renowned. I'll tell that to the healthcare professionals who cared for my Dad during his final illness and who wanted to talk to me because they had been sent on mandatory courses on health ethics run by philosophers and they wanted to discuss the topic. Shall I.
Twit.
quote:
Do you understand how the US healthcare system works at all? |
In my course I used an American book, which gives precise details of what goes on with readings from philosophers, health professionals, case studies and court decisions. It's called "Bioethics" and it's big and purple. So I'd say I have a pretty good idea and it's clear that you don't.
Anyway, no more from me.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
So arguments don't count as proof. |
Duh.
Argue this...
quote:
Of course things will never change from now on so common sense must be right. |
What the hell kind of logic is this?
It's a simple observational fact that not everyone has the same code of ethics.
quote:
Nice try, but it won't work. |
Why not?
Do you not understand that hospital policy (ie, what doctors are allowed to do under that hospital) are governed by the owners of said hospital?
quote:
Gee whiz, I'll tell that to the bunch of healthcare professionals I gave a series of lectures to back in New Zealand. |
It sounds like one of the torturous mandatory lectures corproations and governments do to try to be more PC... 
Oh, just take me here and now...
quote:
Anyway, no more from me. |
Thank God, you're one of the worst arguers on this board, and you claim to be a PhD student in a field that gets its rocks off about pointless arguments.
You wouldn't cut it in a real field, Agathon...
If you want to argue that philosophy is useful today, you need to do just that. You've argued about people in the BC times which theorized about things like the atomic theory, you've mentioned things like multiculturalism for god's sake.
You've been doing nothing but spinning around in circles thinking you're proving something.
Maybe all of this crap makes sense to you as a philosopher because subconsciously you've allowed this laughable argument to prove that philosophy is useful today because you want to feel like your job is important, but to me you've done nothing but confirm my idea that philosophers are pretentious ***** with too much time on their hand today.
Thank you. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Vagabond
|
 |
of realpolitik and counterpropaganda
Jan 1970
time: 05:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
I disagree that philosophy is about wisdom these days.
All of the modern-day philosophers I've met tend to be egotistical idiots who think they're everyone's intellectual superior. |
It's not wise to equate philosophy at its best with some individual philosophers.
quote:
What has philosophy done for society in the past fifty years? |
Again, it is unwise to assume that nothing has been done. Theory of Knowledge, Ethics, Philosophy of Science are all philosophical disciplines, and there has been a great deal of work to be done there. New physical theories such as quantum mechanics, relativity and cosmology gave rise to the need of revising the general world outlook, and philosophers have had a fair share in this effort. In Theory of Knowledge, a revolution was brought about by Godel's Incompleteness Theorem, and philosophers had a hell lot of work to do. Advances in biology and medicine evoked a lot of ethical questions. Someone has to think about them professionally. Eternal questions, such as who we are and why, are still on the agenda. Again, someone has to think about it! New theories on the interrelation of matter and conciousness have been developed. IIRC, the anthropological principles have been formulated fairly recently.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
CyberGnu
|
 |
of the Virtual Serengeti
Apr 1999
time: 05:26
|
|
Oh, in a throwback to a previous topic on this thread:
My girlfriend used to be a double major: pre-med and philospohy.
Pre-med is usually considered "science light". It's the easiest science major possible. Doesn't mean it is easy, though. After all, it is still science.  Nevertheless, she got straight A's in her philo classes, and a mixture of A's and B's in the sciences. And this was a Notre Dame, I should add, a uni with a well respected philo department, IIUIC.
The reason was pretty obvious. You can't bullshit your way to an A in vertebrate biology. The professor doesn't care how eloquent you are, a fish is still a fish. It takes long hours of studying. Her philo classes, on the other hand, were usually dealt with in one long frenzied writing session 12 hours before deadline.
Did she gain something from philo, except a higher GPA? Sure. She can spit out a 15 page paper in as many hours, which I can only dream of. The question is: did she learn anything she couldn;t have learned in, say, english literature? I doubt it. Maybe she got a little bit of head start on her med school bioethics. Maybe not.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26.
Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
25-02-2003 09:07
|