I know less than nothing about philosophy but...

Posted by Diarmuid on September 11, 2000 at 12:13:10:

In Reply to: Repost: Logic is Dumb <-- and yes, that's a deliberately provocative title posted by Sambersil on September 05, 2000 at 02:01:07:

Isn't that what Descartes was on about when he said "I think, therefore I am"?

His point being that nothing he saw with his senses was 100% trustworthy (i.e: he could be hallucinating). But the fact that he was thinking, and aware of thinking, meant that he could be certain that his mind existed, even if everything else was fictional.

: I am an iNTj and a type five with a wing of four. I am 15 and extremely introverted, with hardly any social relations. For the past three years, I have been working on a system of philosophy to answer basic difficulties of existence, purpose, etc. I have what I believe to be a set of solutions, and they make me fairly happy. However, within a few months ago I had an inspiration that questions the entire purpose of the five personality: Assuming logical mistakes are possible, and they seem to be possible, any logical conclusion is not necessary correct because the logician could have made a mistake someplace. This holds true for ANY conclusion, even basic tenets such as 1+1=2. This means that NOTHING is possible to be known. Any refutation of this idea is not necessarily correct either, because it could have a mistake in it. Read that last sentence a second time before you shout mentally in outrage, thinking, for example, that my logic contradicts itself by stating, in effect "nothing is certain, not even this statement"

: This is a repost of my first comment that I had on the comment board, because nobody seems to read the comment board but a lot do read this.

Follow Ups:

• Re: I know less than nothing about philosophy but... Sambersil 00:21:16 09/14/00 (0)

Post a Followup