3 ms·

I am not a philosophy grad nor is English my native language so I am sorry but I am not educated enough to continue this discussion. I agree with you that he c

I am not a philosophy grad nor is English my native language so I am sorry but I am not educated enough to continue this discussion. I agree with you that he could have been more specific, but I do not agree with > said life was great (I summarise). In my interpretation of their comment, I took it to mean life has the potential to be great. For the other two terms I have no opinion, will leave that to OP. But damn, if this is at all representative to what studying philosophy is like, isn't it exhausting?

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
> But damn, if this is at all representative to what studying philosophy is like, isn't it exhausting? Worthless slop is worthless. To make it worth something you need to be precise. Yes, it can be, not exhausting, but sometimes tedious. But that attention to detail is necessary in any constructive endeavor be it software, hardware, mathematics, engineering, governing, why do you think philosophy should be any different? The end results can be worth it. I used to argue a lot with someone, it's only when we agreed to be precise about what we were saying that we got anywhere (to be precise 'got anywhere' = 'started to understand each other's positions and assumptions'). Edit: trying to debate with someone who can only respond with emotionally based certainties and often descends into shouting and blank denials is a wearing and disheartening experience. Also not useful if you're arguing about important things like, I dunno, what to do about pandemics.