And the top post for the month is...

By -
British analysis?

This is what you people have been waiting for me to write about... the limits of analytical philosophy?!

Well, let me get busy!

(At least this has beaten out Bob's dumbass post about inconvenience, which had been the top post for a decade. And it's not really Bob's post that is dumb, but the fact that it sat atop the most-viewed-post list for a decade.)

Comments

  1. Greg Pandatshang12:22 PM

    The thing that I especially like about the inconvenience post is that, without it, I would never have found out about a regular company that supplies cheapest mabinogi gold.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah10:28 AM

      I know! I bought so much o' dat shit!

      Delete
  2. Unknown10:41 AM

    You should make a post about the limits of analytical philosophy Gene.

    To troll all of the analytical atom-splitters who are sure to come out of the woodwork and complain, just keep saying 'but what's your ARGUMENT?!' over and over again, and when they say that something is obvious, say 'what do you mean by that?! What is your ARGUMENT?!'

    Do this over and over until they either give up or realize that you have to have a brain before you can do philosophy; logical analysis is useless if the person behind the atom-splitting is as dumb as an atom himself.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more