Amedeo

If the stars we see are luminous points in our visual consciousness, not physical substances outside the physical eyes, and if such stars are sighted by astronomers in order to determine how far they are from the earth, how is it possible for the claims of the astronomers to be true (that is, about physical stars)???

Loren Pechtel

If cats are birds why don't they have feathers?

snoiduspoitus

Damn. I'm gonna start a thread like that just to get a reaction.

Worked on me.

Smullyan-esque

Yawn. This path leads to solipsism. What choice do we have except to assume that our senses reveal to us something of the real world? Philosophy 101. Take a college class. I'm sure there is a community college close to where you live, and the classes will not be expensive. These are not very original thoughts, and you could save yourself some embarrassment by first aquainting yourself with the end results of centuries of thought on these topics.

I really strongly suggest this, Amadeo. You keep starting threads on topics that a little education would answer for you.

RexT

You could save youself some embarrassment by aquainting yourself with Amedeo's public profile and some of his writing. He has a Ph.D. in philosophy.

Rex

DanBZ

Dutch_labrat

:huh: Argument from authority rules this board now? Don't think so.

His OP showed little sense nor understanding and Smullyan-esque was completely right with his put down.

This is a science board and solipsism as such has nothing to offer us. If reality was as random as solipsists think science would never work.

Smullyan-esque

He claims to be a Ph.D. in philosophy, yet he has in recent weeks created a long string of threads on topics that a sophomore would have studied. Take this particular thread as an example. Doubt the conclusions of astronomers because we cannot solve the "brain in a jar" problem? That sort of logic leads to doubting the very existence of external reality all together! It must be dealt with and put aside before ANY other questions about reality can be addressed. Any halfway competent Philosophy 101 teacher would include this in their curriculum.

On the Internet, anyone can claim any sort of qualification. One of the wonderful things is that, if they cannot back that claim up with a demonstration of actual ability and knowledge, the truth of the matter eventually becomes clear. Who knows? Perhaps Amadeo DOES actually have a Ph.D. in Philosophy. Perhaps it even IS from an accredited institution. No system is perfect. Perhaps it was possible to snow the dissertation committee. But I'm am SURE that the committee would be embarrassed to see this thread.

ppnl

So on the subject of public profiles...what is Caucasianism? Does that mean he believes in Caucasians? What next? Bigfoot?

beausoleil

If the letters I see are patterns of light and dark in my visual consciousness, not symbols intended to convey thoughts from another individual, how is it possible for Amadeo's claim that he has a PhD in philosophy to be true?