4 ms·

Bart Streumer is mentioned in the piece. His book "Unbelievable Errors: An Error Theory about All Normative Judgements" begins with a pretty cool sentence: > Y

• keiferski 6y ago
  Honestly not a bad approach. I wish more people just shared their ideas instead of trying to persuade and convert me to their position.
  • manofmanysmiles 6y ago
    How can you really understand someone’s ideas without understanding all the premises? Isn’t it necessary for then to try to “convince” you insofar as just stating a conclusion without supporting arguments is no different than stating an opinion? Or put a different way, why would you ever desire to hear opinions without trying to understand them or establish their truth?
    • keiferski 6y ago
      Not sure how you get this from the quote. I meant that I prefer it when the mood of a book is this is interesting/beautiful/insightful and not this is my conclusion, now I’m going to construct an argument to convince you it’s the right one.
      • manofmanysmiles 6y ago
        I think my reaction stemmed from > You cannot believe the view I will defend in this book. I therefore will not be able to convince you that this view is true. This appears as a concession that the truth about the topic cannot be determined. In which case, from a philosophical point of view, what’s the point? That being said, I often prefer the presentation of “Here are some interesting things I’ve observed and thoughts I’ve had. Do what you will with them.”